# horse communicators and reason out the window



## Mr Nick (4 March 2013)

how is it that normally sane and rational people let their reason go out of the window when it comes to horse communicators?

Now Ive heard about a lot of rubbish spouted by these people but one has told someone I know (and have a lot of respect for) that their horse is homophobic.  REally.  And I think she may be buying it.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			how is it that normally sane and rational people let their reason go out of the window when it comes to horse communicators?

Now Ive heard about a lot of rubbish spouted by these people but one has told someone I know (and have a lot of respect for) that their horse is homophobic.  REally.  And I think she may be buying it.

Click to expand...

At an old yard a woman had this done, my dad deciding to be hilarious crouched behind back then my mums horses stable and shouted " she's talking out her arse" followed by a neigh 

true though, it's all about money.


----------



## PandorasJar (4 March 2013)

Lol tessybear 

I'd question them coming out though, everyone knows a decent communicator can communicate over the phone...


----------



## Mr Nick (4 March 2013)

oh god yes - I know someone else who sent a photo and had a consultation over the phone. I'd forgotten about that particular madness


----------



## Echo Bravo (4 March 2013)

Because they are either at the end of their tether with said horse and grasping for straws or like to think their horse is not normal when sometimes just good handling sorts it out take your pick.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			At an old yard a woman had this done, my dad deciding to be hilarious crouched behind back then my mums horses stable and shouted " she's talking out her arse" followed by a neigh 

true though, it's all about money.
		
Click to expand...

How very rude!
What on earth has it got to do with your father how this lady spends her money?  Would he behave in that manner if any other visitor came to the yard?  I imagine YO would have something to say if it became a habit!


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			How very rude!
What on earth has it got to do with your father how this lady spends her money?  Would he behave in that manner if any other visitor came to the yard?  I imagine YO would have something to say if it became a habit!
		
Click to expand...

Oh terribly was great though if you have a sense of humour  of course not because normal visitors do not pay stupid amounts to spew bs at people


----------



## PandorasJar (4 March 2013)

Someone on our old yard was told that her horse (lovely thing) was distraught from having been separated from her foal. Horse had never had a foal and owned since a foal. Communicator then said she'd lost a foal. Owner started concocting stories about stallions escaping, having their way and then losing foal.

Reminds me of seeing a medium. I was open, but the questions coming out and clutching at straws was awful... Friend with me fell for it hook line and sinker.
That being said I've seen one who was genuinely incredible whether a cold reader or more... He earned his money.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Always have been doubtful regarding this, i mean if they really could communicate with animals why are they not vets ? or working alongside vets and do something useful with it rather than telling an owner their horse is gay ?


----------



## Honey08 (4 March 2013)

Because to be a vet they'd have to put time and effort into getting onto a course and gaining some exams, whereas as a communicator they can charge money for nothing....


----------



## Foxhunter49 (4 March 2013)

A fool and his money are soon parted!

I have never met an animal communicator that was any good but I have met clairvoyants that were and, some that were not!


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Honey08 said:



			Because to be a vet they'd have to put time and effort into getting onto a course and gaining some exams, whereas as a communicator they can charge money for nothing....
		
Click to expand...

so painfuly true  but hey that's my opinion if people want to spend their money on a communicator be my guest i know it would be better spent on feed, bedding, treats for said horse IMO


----------



## Booboos (4 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			How very rude!
What on earth has it got to do with your father how this lady spends her money?  Would he behave in that manner if any other visitor came to the yard?  I imagine YO would have something to say if it became a habit!
		
Click to expand...

Of course fleecing the desperate and the credulous is not rude, merely taking the piss out of those fleecing the desperate and the credulousis rude!


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Of course fleecing the desperate and the credulous is not rude, merely taking the piss out of those fleeding the desperate and the credulousis rude! 

Click to expand...


----------



## Mr Nick (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			Always have been doubtful regarding this, i mean if they really could communicate with animals why are they not vets ? or working alongside vets and do something useful with it rather than telling an owner their horse is gay ?

Click to expand...

laughing at this TB - she didnt say the horse was gay, she said he was homophobic!
For gods sake dont tell him we think he's a big ole gayer


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			laughing at this TB - she didnt say the horse was gay, she said he was homophobic!
For gods sake dont tell him we think he's a big ole gayer
		
Click to expand...

Oh lawd sorry, see that was my animal communicator skills shining through there


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

I had an experiance with one I am a serious non believer but this was a wierd experiance .
I was having an awful problem with a horse who I was considering having PTS a very serious competitor ( as in has won medals ) said he had used one and it had been a good experiance and he felt I should give it a go his view was it cost £50 which was nothing in comparison with what I had spent on the vets so far.
So I thought what the hell and rang I told the woman that the horse was not right etc etc that she was a homebred that was all.
I sent her a photo from my home and a chq I thought better not tell my OH this .at the allotted time she rang me told me various things about the horse which where interesting including that she fell down on the concrete while she was away and that it hurt which was interesting as that's what thevets and physio thought the injury they where trying to fix was most likely caused by as lip and fall on the hard.
Then as the consultation finished she said I don't know if you are open to this but some horses are here that have passed over recently they want to tell you things are you open to this I was a bit surprised but thought what the hell I had had two put down just before ( bad year that) so I said what do they say she said its a grey mare and a chestnut gelding ( spot on ) they say they are together and we are fine and the gelding said I can see ( he was PTS as he went blind) now I was a bit spooked by this when she said suddenly they say they are going another more important is coming then she said when you sit on the wall in the evening and think of me I am there .
I was so shocked I could not  talk my horse of a lifetime had a stable where you could sit on the wall and talk to the horse I often sit on it in the evening when I am alone and listern to the horses eating and yes I think of her . 
I ended the call quickly and headed for a darkened room .
I still don't know what to make of the experiance , I never gave her any details about these horses or the sitting on the wall thing which was something I did alone no one knew about it .


----------



## Mr Nick (4 March 2013)

yeah you're about as good as me. Let me see....yes he likes hay, likes his field ...but he does like to come in at tea time.   £50 please?


----------



## Delicious_D (4 March 2013)

I think its a load of codswhollop if you ask me!
It is completely unregulated and to be able to communicate over the phone or from a picture is rediculous!!!

A yard i was at told me my elderly stallion missed the company of mares....I hadnt asked them to come out but someone at the yard did. I politely informed them my 4 year old mare was just fine and dandy.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 March 2013)

I've never paid to have an animal communicator but by strange coincidence on 3 occasions Reiki healers have been around and offered to do some Reiki, twice on horses and once on my dog.

 Each time, they have told me things about the horses and the dog that I'd completely forgotten about and seemed of no consequence at the time.
 There was also quite a remarkable physical or behavioural response after being seen.

I still wouldn't look for and pay for any type of communicator but my experiences have been very odd, in a positive way.


BTW, I also find Tessy bears father very rude. Embarrassing someone because you disagree with them isn't funny.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Delicious_D said:



			I think its a load of codswhollop if you ask me!
It is completely unregulated and to be able to communicate over the phone or from a picture is rediculous!!!

A yard i was at told me my elderly stallion missed the company of mares....I hadnt asked them to come out but someone at the yard did. I politely informed them my 4 year old mare was just fine and dandy. 

Click to expand...

 what did they say after out of interest ?


----------



## Delicious_D (4 March 2013)

They told me they were just telling me what the horse was telling them. I muttered under my breath the horse was telling me she was bats but wish i had said it louder!

Said communicator then instructed my friend to put their two horses on a long course of a certain herb as they were very anxious and feared they might lose said friend as their owner....


----------



## YorksG (4 March 2013)

If the communications were damaging their horses, I could see the need for people to voice their concerns. How others spend their money in ways which are none invasive is none of anyone elses business. If they were spending their money on training methods which they didn't understand, spending a fortune on over molassed rubbish feeds etc, then I could see the point of making comment, although hopefully not of the 'she's talking out of her backside' type, which isn't humerous, just obnoxious and childish, but how others spend their money in a way which causes no harm, is none of anyone elses business.


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

Delicious_D said:



			I think its a load of codswhollop if you ask me!
It is completely unregulated and to be able to communicate over the phone or from a picture is rediculous!!!

A yard i was at told me my elderly stallion missed the company of mares....I hadnt asked them to come out but someone at the yard did. I politely informed them my 4 year old mare was just fine and dandy. 

Click to expand...

Of course it's ridiculous but my experiance is ture and was genuinely very very strange .
What regulation has got to do with it I am not sure people should spend their money as they choose no need to regulate everything.


----------



## Delicious_D (4 March 2013)

I dont think i am obnoxius or childish. I dont believe in it, but can understand why some might. our brains look for patterns and i suspect if we are desperate for a solution or reason, we will cling onto any hope of an answer.

ETA - i added regulations because the only communicator i came across constantly prescribed herbs etc for owners horses.


----------



## YorksG (4 March 2013)

Delicious_D said:



			I dont think i am obnoxius or childish. I dont believe in it, but can understand why some might. our brains look for patterns and i suspect if we are desperate for a solution or reason, we will cling onto any hope of an answer.
		
Click to expand...

The comment about obnoxious and childish was in respons to the comment by Tessybears father.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Evil father   Must add though she was, told woman her horse had been badly abused when  5 for a period of 6 months, owner had horse since a a yearling till she was 7  Owner also agreed with evil fathers comment later


----------



## Booboos (4 March 2013)

horserider said:



			BTW, I also find Tessy bears father very rude. Embarrassing someone because you disagree with them isn't funny.
		
Click to expand...

He wasn't embarrassing someone because he disagreed with them, he was calling them out for being a fraud.

Imagine for a moment that you can communicate with animals, what would you do with this ability?

- you could help find all the stolen horses by just asking them where they are

- you could help avoid loads of welfare cases by having the horses report their owners straight to the welfare authorities

- you could have any horse involved in an accident give you the location of its unconscious rider

the list goes on. Instead you decide to charge people to tell them inanities - you are either a fraud or immoral.


----------



## Delicious_D (4 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			The comment about obnoxious and childish was in respons to the comment by Tessybears father.
		
Click to expand...

Oh ok  sorry


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

Delicious_D said:



			I dont think i am obnoxius or childish. I dont believe in it, but can understand why some might. our brains look for patterns and i suspect if we are desperate for a solution or reason, we will cling onto any hope of an answer.

ETA - i added regulations because the only communicator i came across constantly prescribed herbs etc for owners horses.
		
Click to expand...

She did not perscribe anything she suggested that someone feed dried plants to their horse not the same thing if the person was fool enough to feed them that's their choice .
I was not desperate for a solution more curious because the man who persuaded me to try was no ones idea of a desparate fool .
It is still one of the most spooky strange experiances I have ever had.


----------



## YorksG (4 March 2013)

Goldenstar said:



			She did not perscribe anything she suggested that someone feed dried plants to their horse not the same thing if the person was fool enough to feed them that's their choice .
I was not desperate for a solution more curious because the man who persuaded me to try was no ones idea of a desparate fool .
It is still one of the most spooky strange experiances I have ever had.
		
Click to expand...

As a complete sceptic I arranged for a 'reading' from someone who was training to communicate. I had a very similar experience to yours Goldenstar, with phrases that no-one who didn't know my family and my horses could possibly have used about the horses.


----------



## quirky (4 March 2013)

Each to thier own.
Don't knock it till you've tried it


----------



## Aarrghimpossiblepony (4 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			how is it that normally sane and rational people let their reason go out of the window when it comes to horse communicators?

*Now Ive heard about a lot of rubbish spouted by these people but one has told someone I know (and have a lot of respect for) that their horse is homophobic.  REally.*  And I think she may be buying it.

Click to expand...

TBF, that has given a few people a real laugh and so perhaps the 50 quid was well spent.

How much is a ticket to one of the top comedians?


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			As a complete sceptic I arranged for a 'reading' from someone who was training to communicate. I had a very similar experience to yours Goldenstar, with phrases that no-one who didn't know my family and my horses could possibly have used about the horses.
		
Click to expand...

It was a disturbing experiance , I am glad to know I am not the only one.


----------



## Mr Nick (4 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			If the communications were damaging their horses, I could see the need for people to voice their concerns. How others spend their money in ways which are none invasive is none of anyone elses business. If they were spending their money on training methods which they didn't understand, spending a fortune on over molassed rubbish feeds etc, then I could see the point of making comment, although hopefully not of the 'she's talking out of her backside' type, which isn't humerous, just obnoxious and childish, but how others spend their money in a way which causes no harm, is none of anyone elses business.
		
Click to expand...

well that's a view but personally I do think that someone attributing homohphobia to a bloody horse is worthy of comment.  And actually I can also think of potential harm this could cause if accepted and shared


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			laughing at this TB - she didnt say the horse was gay, she said he was homophobic!
For gods sake dont tell him we think he's a big ole gayer
		
Click to expand...




Still chuckling at the idea of a homophobic horse though.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (4 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			He wasn't embarrassing someone because he disagreed with them, he was calling them out for being a fraud.
		
Click to expand...

He was certainly risking embarrassing the person who had invited the communicator onto the yard.  What does this extremely rude man do if a farrier whose work he dislikes comes onto the yard?  Or if someone delivers feed that he wouldn't give to his horse?  Or drives a car that he doesn't consider to be top notch onto the yard?

I can understand his daughter defending his behaviour, she knows no better but why a perfect stranger should do so is completely beyond me!  And why any-one thinks it is acceptable to comment on how someone else spends their money is a complete mystery.

Yet another reason why I am thankful that I am not on a livery yard.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			He was certainly risking embarrassing the person who had invited the communicator onto the yard.  What does this extremely rude man do if a farrier whose work he dislikes comes onto the yard?  Or if someone delivers feed that he wouldn't give to his horse?  Or drives a car that he doesn't consider to be top notch onto the yard?

I can understand his daughter defending his behaviour, she knows no better but why a perfect stranger should do so is completely beyond me!

Yet another reason why I am thankful that I am not on a livery yard.
		
Click to expand...

Oh lighten up please, he is not extremely rude, perhaps not done in the best way but did say sorry after "she knows no better" I find that rude !

Yawn next thing please 

p.s we keep ours at home now this was 10+ years ago, he doesnt get involved with the horses,  but if someone did something he didnt agree with he would speak out due to freedom of speech.


----------



## Beausmate (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:






Still chuckling at the idea of a homophobic horse though. 

Click to expand...

It's still not as good as the racehorse who wanted to be a fireman


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			It's still not as good as the racehorse who wanted to be a fireman 

Click to expand...

thank you for that , crying


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			It's still not as good as the racehorse who wanted to be a fireman 

Click to expand...

No its not perhaps he will get a chance in his next life .


----------



## YorksG (4 March 2013)

Harm to the horse? Homophobia is not the exclusive perogative of animal communicators, it is unnacceptable whoever is saying it. Would the comments have been the same if a vet, farrier, equine dentist had made homophobic comments?


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Now have a mental image of a horse in a yellow fireman hat running on its back legs into a house on fire


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			Now have a mental image of a horse in a yellow fireman hat running on its back legs into a house on fire
		
Click to expand...

I was assuming in a Buddhist way he might be human next time.
If us lot came back as horses there would be trouble.


----------



## Hedwards (4 March 2013)

I am a non believer too, and as yet have never ever seen anything to convince me its not a load of old jibberish, and no different to what Derren Brown does. However, I have seen it have what i believe to be placebo effect. a nervous friend had a 'communicator' out when she had lost all confidence with pony, and was generally nervous on horseback (pony was fine I rode him a lot as did others, just needed to be ridden rather then sat on and allowed to do what he wanted... Which is what friend did) the communicator 'had a word' with the pony, and gave the owner a 'check list' of things to do before getting on (which stirrup leather to pull down 1st, stroke his neck x number of times or some such other rubbish) so owner with renewed confidence after paying £50 to the communicator, follows the 'list' gets on, rides pony with confidence - low and behold he was well behaved... It worked, but not because the pony had communicated with someone, but because the owners confidence grew and she did what everyone else did on that pony and just ride him 'properly'...

Didn't last long and pony subsequently sold, but that's my view anyway!


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Wigwam_bam said:



			Neigh-Nor Neigh-Nor !!!!! Weeeeeee. 



(I have had far to much caffeine!!)
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear 



Goldenstar said:



			I was assuming in a Buddhist way he might be human next time.
If us lot came back as horses there would be trouble.
		
Click to expand...

Oh i bet


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 March 2013)

teddy bear said:



			Oh lighten up please, he is not extremely rude, perhaps not done in the best way but did say sorry after "she knows no better" I find that rude !

Yawn next thing please 

p.s we keep ours at home now this was 10+ years ago, he doesn't get involved with the horses,  but if someone did something he didn't agree with he would speak out due to freedom of speech.
		
Click to expand...

If he saw an obese man eating a pie in the street would he also speak out due to freedom of speech ?


Freedom of speech is a privilege that comes with responsibility. Your father's remarks were just rude designed to belittle the livery.


----------



## Littlelegs (4 March 2013)

I am sceptical, & tbh think probably 99% are charlatans. But, I do think some people have a sixth sense & can pick up on things they don't have any reason to know. But, although no less psychic, I do think even with those who aren't charlatans, & have a genuine gift, they are reading the owner, not the horse. Provided the horses more important needs are met, then whilst I don't like the idea of the desperate getting false hope, or the gullible being conned by a fake, its otherwise nobody else's business. 
   As for tessybears dads comment, I've witnessed some awful instructors & so called 'professionals' before, who unlike a fake communicator are actively doing harm. It doesn't mean I have a right to shout 'you are speaking out of your ass' if they are with a client.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

horserider said:



			If he saw an obese man eating a pie in the street would he also speak out due to freedom of speech ?


Freedom of speech is a privilege that comes with responsibility. Your father's remarks were just rude designed to belittle the livery.
		
Click to expand...

Livery like i said afterwards agreed, she wasn't offended and had been a family friend for years like a sister to my mum, so in no way was that his aim.

Like i said yawn lets leave it at that, wouldn't have put it up if a drama was going to be made out of it as there certainly wasn't one made at the time...

off to bed night all


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			It's still not as good as the racehorse who wanted to be a fireman 

Click to expand...

You can't just throw that out without explaining further!  Tell me more! 


Also, by the by, how did Tessy bear change into Teddy bear in one of Horseride's quotes?


----------



## Aarrghimpossiblepony (4 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Harm to the horse? Homophobia is not the exclusive perogative of animal communicators, it is unnacceptable whoever is saying it. Would the comments have been the same if a vet, farrier, equine dentist had made homophobic comments?
		
Click to expand...

Not quite understanding this.
Had the vet, farrier, equine dentist made homophobic comments then yes they should be pulled up on them.

But what "comments" had the horse made to label them as homophobic?


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			You can't just throw that out without explaining further!  Tell me more! 


Also, by the by, how did Tessy bear change into Teddy bear in one of Horseride's quotes? 

Click to expand...

Magic 

I have been telling myself to go to bed for the past 15 minutes .. stupid HHO


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

Re Tessy bear's Dad: Okay, it doesn't sound like something I would do, but it's a funny story of something which happened between friends who all seemed to have enjoyed the joke. Hardly worth dissecting and being outraged by, surely?


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			Magic 

I have been telling myself to go to bed for the past 15 minutes .. stupid HHO

Click to expand...

Only 15 minutes? Lightweight. I do that for HOURS here.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			Re Tessy bear's Dad: Okay, it doesn't sound like something I would do, but it's a funny story of something which happened between friends who all seemed to have enjoyed the joke. Hardly worth dissecting and being outraged by, surely? 

Click to expand...

I agree not fantastic but please you simply cannot call a man horrible from one tale, he is normally very well behaved and will do anything for a person in need, no more fighting please ... Me no like fighting


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			Also, by the by, how did Tessy bear change into Teddy bear in one of Horseride's quotes? 

Click to expand...


Oooh-er. That's a bit creepy.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Oooh-er. That's a bit creepy.

Click to expand...

-offers chocolate as peace treaty- 

Can we let it lie, i dont want to go to bed on a bad note  sorry if i upset with my reactions .


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Oooh-er. That's a bit creepy.

Click to expand...

You mean you didn't do it?  


Cue Twilight Zone music......





(apologies to those too young to remember TZ)


----------



## Elsiecat (4 March 2013)

Teddybears dad called out jokingly against something he disagreed with. You are all calling out unjokingly against something you disagree with. 

Whilst I wouldn't say what her dad did, I'd certainly be thinking it! *wonders off to imagine a world where horses are free from homophobia*


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Harm to the horse? Homophobia is not the exclusive perogative of animal communicators, it is unnacceptable whoever is saying it. Would the comments have been the same if a vet, farrier, equine dentist had made homophobic comments?
		
Click to expand...



I don't think the AC made homophobic remarks, they just said the horse was homophobic.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Elsiecat said:



*Teddy*bears dad called out jokingly against something he disagreed with. You are all calling out unjokingly against something you disagree with. 

Whilst I wouldn't say what her dad did, I'd certainly be thinking it! *wonders off to imagine a world where horses are free from homophobia*
		
Click to expand...

It's catching* teddy* perhaps the ghost of TFC ?... hmm i really need to go to bed...


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			It's catching* teddy* perhaps the ghost of TFC ?... hmm i really need to go to bed...

Click to expand...

'night Ted.


----------



## Elsiecat (4 March 2013)

I wrote tessybear  
Maybe my phone is haunted..


----------



## Moomin1 (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			You mean you didn't do it?  


Cue Twilight Zone music......





(apologies to those too young to remember TZ) 

Click to expand...

Oh please don't mention the Twilight Zone music! 

My OH made me (and his two young kids) go on the Tower of Terror in Disneyland Paris, saying it 'was just a little tickle in the tummy, like a froghopper at a fair'.....Half an hour later, two screaming crying kids and one extremely angry and faint girlfriend (I have never felt so scared on a ride in all my life!) later, he was in the bad books!  They play that music at the beginning of the ride and it makes my blood run cold now!


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			'night Ted. 

Click to expand...

Maybe i am called Teddy and you all don't know na night 



Elsiecat said:



			I wrote tessybear  
Maybe my phone is haunted..
		
Click to expand...


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

Elsiecat said:



			I wrote tessybear  
Maybe my phone is haunted..
		
Click to expand...

You need to call a telephone communicator who will have a word with it and see if it's unhappy because it wants to be a fireman.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			Oh please don't mention the Twilight Zone music! 

My OH made me (and his two young kids) go on the Tower of Terror in Disneyland Paris, saying it 'was just a little tickle in the tummy, like a froghopper at a fair'.....Half an hour later, two screaming crying kids and one extremely angry and faint girlfriend (I have never felt so scared on a ride in all my life!) later, he was in the bad books!  They play that music at the beginning of the ride and it makes my blood run cold now!

Click to expand...

tootles off to youtube this twilight zone im curious now


----------



## mandwhy (4 March 2013)

I can kind of imagine that going to see a horse and it guiding you to an unknown injury is plausible, but not through the phone or looking at a picture. I do believe some people and most animals have abilities/senses most of us can't fathom though, even if it is just being really good at reading emotions.

The homophobic horse is pretty funny!

 He obviously spends a lot of time thinking about morality within human society, which is odd, since he's a horse. Unless he specifically meant gay horses?


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			tootles off to youtube this twilight zone im curious now
		
Click to expand...

1950s spooky series, sort of the X Files of its day. Each week another story of supernatural happenings. Famous for the music and the intro "you are about to enter the twilight zone" Do de do de..... (sorry Moomin)


Now off to bed, Ted.


----------



## Goldenstar (4 March 2013)

mandwhy said:



			I can kind of imagine that going to see a horse and it guiding you to an unknown injury is plausible, but not through the phone or looking at a picture. I do believe some people and most animals have abilities/senses most of us can't fathom though, even if it is just being really good at reading emotions.

The homophobic horse is pretty funny!

 He obviously spends a lot of time thinking about morality within human society, which is odd, since he's a horse. Unless he specifically meant gay horses?
		
Click to expand...

Gay horses I am seeing Katie price rugs red and black stables .
He's obviously an interesting horse may be going to be a physiologist in his next life.


----------



## tessybear (4 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			1950s spooky series, sort of the X Files of its day. Each week another story of supernatural happenings. Famous for the music and the intro "you are about to enter the twilight zone" Do de do de..... (sorry Moomin)


Now off to bed, Ted. 

Click to expand...

ooo cover your ears Moomin 

yes Ma'am  up at 6am


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

mandwhy said:



			The homophobic horse is pretty funny!

 He obviously spends a lot of time thinking about morality within human society, which is odd, since he's a horse. Unless he specifically meant gay horses?
		
Click to expand...

My boyfriend used to have a racist doberman. It was really embarrassing, it was fine with everyone, until it saw a black person then it would start barking and growling at them.


----------



## Littlelegs (4 March 2013)

That's hilarious fiona. My friends dog is anti-disability. He's fine with learning difficulties or mobility issues, but conditions where the person has different body language or vocals he is a bit off with, rather than his people loving self.


----------



## FionaM12 (4 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			That's hilarious fiona. My friends dog is anti-disability. He's fine with learning difficulties or mobility issues, but conditions where the person has different body language or vocals he is a bit off with, rather than his people loving self.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, I've known dogs like that. My own dog doesn't like anyone he thinks is walking funny. . I work with disabled people and sometimes colleague's dogs visit work but I'd never let mine as he'd probably disgrace me. 

However, I have _never_ heard of an animal who responded in such a way to someone because they were gay.  Or in fact even showing they had the slightest concept of human sexual politics.


----------



## eatmyshorts (4 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			I am sceptical, & tbh think probably 99% are charlatans. But, I do think some people have a sixth sense & can pick up on things they don't have any reason to know. But, although no less psychic, I do think even with those who aren't charlatans, & have a genuine gift, they are reading the owner, not the horse.
		
Click to expand...

This. There are cowboys and fakes in all walks of life. My opinion is also that (whether they know it or not) normally the AC is reading the owner. It's a win win situation e.g. owner suspects the horse has been abused in the past, AC picks up on this and says the horse has told them it has been abused, owner is proved right, AC also has got it right. 

As in any reading, there may well be truth in it but it's not a science and it should always be taken with a pinch of salt. It becomes dangerous when it overshadows professionals advise ie. Vets or farrier. I remember hearing of an AC who was saying the horses were telling her their shoes were too small and hurting their feet - owners starting giving their farriers a hard time and asking for bigger shoes. Apparently the Council of Farriery had to step in and ask her to stop saying such things!


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 March 2013)

tessybear said:



			-offers chocolate as peace treaty- 

Can we let it lie, i dont want to go to bed on a bad note  sorry if i upset with my reactions .
		
Click to expand...

Hmm, chocolate...

Hey, no problem. I was probably over sensitive today as a livery was absolutely distraught and left after some others had made fun of her.
 Yuk, sometimes livery yards are the pits.

I'm sure your dad is lovely really and his remarks were taken in a completely different way.

Sleep well Teddy, erm, tessy and don't have any strange dreams...


----------



## NaeNae87 (5 March 2013)

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and their own beliefs.

I don't see how someone else chooses to spend their money is anyone elses business. Especially if the horses that are having the session are well looked after. If the owner was choosing to spend money on a communicator rather than on food, bedding, farrier, vets etc.. that would be a different story.

I am skeptical, but I have witnessed some things that have come out that I know for a fact and am 100% positive that only my horses and I have known about. 

I have a problem when people try and force their beliefs on others. Those who believe, going around and forcing stuff down others throats and vice versa. If you don't believe and go around loudly proclaiming that things you don't necessarily understand are a load of (insert your choice of word her), you are just as bad as the other group.


----------



## Beausmate (5 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			You can't just throw that out without explaining further!  Tell me more! 

Click to expand...

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=589590&highlight=fireman

There you go. 

And for those who don't know about The Twilight Zone, here's the original intro.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y


----------



## luckyoldme (5 March 2013)

Like it or not there are things we can t explain.
I have had a couple of experiences i just can t explain despite being a sceptic.
My experiences were not with dead people but with two very close relatives. My brother lives in australia. when he first left he didn t come home for many many years. I used to wonder if i would still recognise him if he passed me in the street. One night sat in a truck waiting to be unloaded on night shift i was drifting off. Suddenly i saw his face clear as anything, and that night i kept thinking of him all night. The next day my mum had a phone call to say he had gone to hopital with a virus. When I spoke to him he said "I thought i was going to die"
I also felt my dads pains at times during his last few weeks. he was in an induced coma but I told my sister in law that they had woken him because i could feel the pain in my back...this matched with the time they had done so.
I can t explain any of these things and its certainly not something i could make a living out of or would rely on...there have been many more over the years. 
In my dads case I felt his pain before he died but have never every (dissapoiningly) felt his prescence since he died..so i feel a bit cheated!
Not sure why i told these stories here but i have now!


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

People may be free to spend their money any way they want, but that doesn't mean that other people are free to charge for whatever they want - some things are fraud and rightly regulated (and ridiculed).


----------



## mynutmeg (5 March 2013)

Wigwam_bam said:



			Neigh-Nor Neigh-Nor !!!!! Weeeeeee. 



(I have had far to much caffeine!!)
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Rebels (5 March 2013)

I met a guy called Lightning Fingers owing to having been struck by lightning 3 times (yeah, I know, just nod and smile!!) This gave him supernatural powers and the ability to heal and communicate with animals. General appearance was unkempt druid. However for £75 he would come and heal your horse or you. He would perform some odd dance type manouvere next to the horse then draw the bad energy out. This was without touching the horse. Meanwhile the rest of the yard would watch with bemused expectation (sparks, lightning, solar eclipse, that kind of thing) until he drew so much bad energy out he had to have a sit down. Funnily enough that long never dumped the kid again after several months of allowing her to stay on for roughly 5 mins at a time. I reckon it was so scared the weird man would come back and get it that it decided to behave!


----------



## tessybear (5 March 2013)

Thank you for that rebels - it's 8am and I'm howling again


----------



## Luci07 (5 March 2013)

I do think there are some genuine people who can do this but unfortunately, a huge number of charlatans. Ditto with psychics who effectively play on peoples unhappiness to keep hooking them in. In fact, a "proper" spiritualist is not supposed to make money out of their gift. 

I have had personal unexplained experiences so I do truly believe there is more out there than we can understand but detest anyone seeking to manipulate another who is needing help.


----------



## Landcruiser (5 March 2013)

I studied science at Uni, and am as sceptical and athiest as they come. BUT. 
A friend worked with a woman who was an animal communicator IN HER SPARE TIME. She didn't charge for it, just did it as a sort of hobby. She'd never done a horse, so I had her out to do my two, just to see what happened, really. 

She clearly hadn't been around horses before, and didn't know the proper names for stuff. My one boy, Tuga, who I'd only had for a month or so by then apparently told her, amongst lots of other stuff, that he missed the cat, and he missed his purple food thing on the wall. Now, I'd been to pick him up myself, and had mentioned to no other living soul that he had a Lickit tongue twirler on his stable wall...purple...and that there was a little nest in the corner where THE CAT SLEPT. I'd even forgotten these things until then. She also said he'd been starved - he's incredibly greedy and very likely he was starved in his previous life  as he's a Uraguy criollo who came over on the meat boat.

She then tried my other boy, Pat. She said "He's a man" as in he's very masculine. He's since been tested for being a rig, and his stable habits could only be those of a man (pees on the concrete, seems to enjoy it splashing up his legs), but at the time he was just standing in the field, doing nothing. She tried and tried but couldn't get anything out of him. He just looked at her for a bit, and walked off - utterly typical of him, particularly back then. He has to do things on his terms, and if he says "Nah" that's the end of it unless you want a big fight. Very suspicious, and with a lot of issues (another criollo).

She wrote me about 3 sides of A4 with lots of other stuff, and on a second visit a few months later, she did get some stuff from Pat too. Most of the stuff was at least plausible, but some of it, like the cat and the lick, was mind boggling. So I just don't know any more...


----------



## Orls (5 March 2013)

I think some animal communicators are complete frauds and should not be allowed to charge for their service however .... One I knew was amazing. I met her while working abroad. We had a horse on the yard with several behavioural problems and were really tearing our hair out regarding the cause. It had had tests and seen the vet numerous times, also the chiropractor, saddler, dentist, NH specialist etc. Our final attempt to get to the root of the problem was calling this communicator to come out and have a word with him. She chatted with him for about 20 minutes and said he had a virus and because of this was generally feeling very down in the dumps and acting up. Turns out this virus hadn't been tested for, when the vet came out to do the test it was positive ... Horse received treatment and rest and his whole manner, attitude and behaviour improved hugely. 

She was an amazing person to meet, very talented and well known in the area for helping so many horses. She never came up with any crap about past lives unlike anything one I met .... A crazy livery used to have a different communicator talk with her horse regularly. She claimed the horse had been a soldier in a past life and was angry about being killed in a war which he didn't agree with in the first place  Apparently this is why said horse would bite everyone who handled it and pinned the sharer against the wall of his stall ....


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

Landcruiser said:



			I studied science at Uni, and am as sceptical and athiest as they come. BUT. 
A friend worked with a woman who was an animal communicator IN HER SPARE TIME. She didn't charge for it, just did it as a sort of hobby. She'd never done a horse, so I had her out to do my two, just to see what happened, really. 

She clearly hadn't been around horses before, and didn't know the proper names for stuff. My one boy, Tuga, who I'd only had for a month or so by then apparently told her, amongst lots of other stuff, that he missed the cat, and he missed his purple food thing on the wall. Now, I'd been to pick him up myself, and had mentioned to no other living soul that he had a Lickit tongue twirler on his stable wall...purple...and that there was a little nest in the corner where THE CAT SLEPT. I'd even forgotten these things until then. She also said he'd been starved - he's incredibly greedy and very likely he was starved in his previous life  as he's a Uraguy criollo who came over on the meat boat.

She then tried my other boy, Pat. She said "He's a man" as in he's very masculine. He's since been tested for being a rig, and his stable habits could only be those of a man (pees on the concrete, seems to enjoy it splashing up his legs), but at the time he was just standing in the field, doing nothing. She tried and tried but couldn't get anything out of him. He just looked at her for a bit, and walked off - utterly typical of him, particularly back then. He has to do things on his terms, and if he says "Nah" that's the end of it unless you want a big fight. Very suspicious, and with a lot of issues (another criollo).

She wrote me about 3 sides of A4 with lots of other stuff, and on a second visit a few months later, she did get some stuff from Pat too. Most of the stuff was at least plausible, but some of it, like the cat and the lick, was mind boggling. So I just don't know any more...
		
Click to expand...

Horses cannot see the colour purple so you either have an extraordinary animal or a fibbing communicator.


----------



## Hippona (5 March 2013)

Horses see all colours...just more 'washed out' than we see them.

The 'colours' that stand out most to a horse are black and white....in stark contrast to the washed out colours.

Thats why they spook at white carrier bags, black bin liners etrc.....


----------



## mle22 (5 March 2013)

I once had a horse communicate with me - well my daughter's pony to be precise. This is many yeras ago now, we went to a show and as we were getting him tacked up I 'heard' him tell me exactly what he was going to do, ie dump my daughter during the jumping and take off through the gate. Daughter went in to jump, pony stopped dead after a fence and put his head down so that daughter went sailing over onto the ground, pony left ring, went straight to the gate out of the field where the show was being held and took off down the road. I've never been able to explain it to myself but that is exactly what happened. I heard his plan at least half an hour before he carried it out!


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Horses see all colours...just more 'washed out' than we see them.

The 'colours' that stand out most to a horse are black and white....in stark contrast to the washed out colours.

Thats why they spook at white carrier bags, black bin liners etrc.....
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, science says 'no'. Horses are dichromats and seem to perceive colour like human dichromats, i.e. they have trouble differentiating reds from greens, lime greens from orange and blues from purple.

They perceive neutral colours like trichromats which is why black and white objects stand out for horses.


----------



## Farma (5 March 2013)

I find it total madness that people pay for this but more so that a lady i was stabled with wouldnt get a vet out to her lame horse until the communicator had been as she felt that he would be able to tell her more than a vet.

Words actually fail me that so many people are conned into this.

Oh and the amount of girls in Essex i know who have been told that their horse likes bling and pink!!!!! You couldnt make it up!


----------



## foxy1 (5 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Sorry, science says 'no'. Horses are dichromats and seem to perceive colour like human dichromats, i.e. they have trouble differentiating reds from greens, lime greens from orange and blues from purple.

They perceive neutral colours like trichromats which is why black and white objects stand out for horses.
		
Click to expand...


How do we (science) know this? Not argueing, I'm interested BTW


----------



## 1stclassalan (5 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			Still chuckling at the idea of a homophobic horse though.
		
Click to expand...

Oh ho! Don't let TFC hear you say that!!! You and the horse will be banned.


----------



## 1stclassalan (5 March 2013)

My neighbour is a clairvoyant - he's just been round and asked me what tomorrow's weather will be like.

Local pub has been ADVERTISING a psychic evening - don't they know???

You can communicate with animals to a certain extent because they mostly use body language and the nuances of that for horses would fill several tomes but any idea that someone can "read" them from a still picture is a charlatan - anyone who says that they receive messages from dead horses or people needs a good smack up the side of their ear with a muck shovel. 

Ah... you know, I'd have thought you'd have seen that coming?


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

foxy1 said:



			How do we (science) know this? Not argueing, I'm interested BTW 

Click to expand...

One way is behavioural studies but the results can be conflicting. An example of a study is to reward horses for choosing a card with a circle on it, then present the circle in different colour combinations and draw conclusions from that as to which colours horses can see.


More convincing are physiological studies of the eye and arguments by analogy from human eyesight. Humans are typically trichromats but we know that human dichromats perceive colours differently to trichromats. We observe that horses are dichromats and draw an inference that they must perceive colours like human dichromats. Along side this is a theory of the wavelengths colour presents itself in and a theory of how the different types of retinas perceive these wavelengths.

A nice summary of the literature:

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijz/2009/721798/


----------



## Landcruiser (5 March 2013)

Yes, whatever, about the _colour_ of the twirly lick. I'd never seen one of those things before, and I'm pretty certain the communicator hadn't ever seen one. My purple could be your green, but we'd both call it the same thing. 

I'm more interested in just how she did that - I still have the info she wrote down, charging nothing, and it still astounds me with its specifics. 

I fully agree that there are a thousand charlattans out there, and just as many mugs....but how could she have known about the cat???


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

Landcruiser said:



			Yes, whatever, about the _colour_ of the twirly lick. I'd never seen one of those things before, and I'm pretty certain the communicator hadn't ever seen one. My purple could be your green, but we'd both call it the same thing. 

I'm more interested in just how she did that - I still have the info she wrote down, charging nothing, and it still astounds me with its specifics. 

I fully agree that there are a thousand charlattans out there, and just as many mugs....but how could she have known about the cat???

Click to expand...

Eeeerh...she made it up? 

She flooded you with loads of ideas, you responded to some of them, she picked up on your body language and to finish it off we all have a tendency to remember what seems correct rather than what seems wrong so the overall impression was that she got a lot of things right. 

How could she not have known about the cat???? Most yards have a cat, it's not exactly an insane guess! And if you hadn't had a cat yourself, she could always have claimed it was a memory from his previous home.

The point about the colour is that the horse could not have seen purple so it could not have told her purple. If she never went into specifics either, then it's not really difficult to see how she got it right. "He misses the food thingey on the way"  is bound to be right as it could refer to the manger, the haynet, the salt lick, the wood he was chewing, etc. all you have to do is fill in the gaps and hey presto mind reading!

I challenge any communicator out there to 'speak' to any currently stolen horse and ask him the number plate of his thief's car so the police can track him down. Why not do something useful with such an incredible gift?


----------



## Hippona (5 March 2013)

My yard doesnt have a cat. Or a twirly lick.
Science cant prove everything.
At best....it can disprove


----------



## Nicnac (5 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=589590&highlight=fireman

There you go. 

Click to expand...

Ha you remembered my fireman story.  To give the background it was my farrier at a training yard where one of the lady owners decided to get the 'Horse whisperer' in to find out why her horse wasn't winning.  She got the answer


----------



## Booboos (5 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			My yard doesnt have a cat. Or a twirly lick.
Science cant prove everything.
At best....it can disprove 

Click to expand...

Yeah I don't believe in gravity either. I thoroughly recommend this approach next time you get thrown of a horse, just refuse to believe in gravity and you will harmlessly levitate above the ground.


----------



## spookypony (5 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Yeah I don't believe in gravity either. I thoroughly recommend this approach next time you get thrown of a horse, just refuse to believe in gravity and you will harmlessly levitate above the ground.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't that how Arthur Dent learns how to fly?


----------



## MerrySherryRider (5 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Yeah I don't believe in gravity either. I thoroughly recommend this approach next time you get thrown of a horse, just refuse to believe in gravity and you will harmlessly levitate above the ground.
		
Click to expand...


Like this ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygcUG9VvO7A


----------



## Littlelegs (5 March 2013)

I think I actually have the gift. Does anyone on here have a bay horse? I'm getting a strong image of a bay in a field, he's telling me he would like more mollassed mixes, but knows you only restrict them for his own good. I'm also getting the vision of a brick building, & a shovel near-by, & some buckets too. The horse says he prefers rolling without a rug, & he remembers the time he farted whilst you were grooming. For anyone else wanting a reading, I can pm my paypal account.


----------



## Beausmate (5 March 2013)

Nicnac said:



			Ha you remembered my fireman story.  To give the background it was my farrier at a training yard where one of the lady owners decided to get the 'Horse whisperer' in to find out why her horse wasn't winning.  She got the answer 

Click to expand...

It's a great story   Maybe they should have got him a blue flashing light to wear on racedays?


----------



## Patterdale (6 March 2013)

*snort* littlelegs you beat me to it!  

Last time there was a thread on here I 'read' someone's horse for them, just to prove it was complete bullplop. Ill try and find it......


----------



## Booboos (6 March 2013)

spookypony said:



			Isn't that how Arthur Dent learns how to fly? 

Click to expand...

Yes, all my best ideas are plagiarised! Then again, wait no, I had the idea first and Douglas read my mind and stole it! Give me my rightful royalties for the Hitchicker's Guide now!


----------



## Hippona (6 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			My yard doesnt have a cat. Or a twirly lick.
Science cant prove everything.
At best....it can disprove 

Click to expand...




Booboos said:



			Yeah I don't believe in gravity either. I thoroughly recommend this approach next time you get thrown of a horse, just refuse to believe in gravity and you will harmlessly levitate above the ground.
		
Click to expand...

Hmm. Theres more to Life, the Universe and Everything than just the stuff you choose to believe in.

Just because it can't be proved.....doesn't prove anything.

Calm down dear


----------



## DJ (6 March 2013)

Someone did a reading on a horse of mine who at the time i was thinking about PTS. (i did end up having to PTS)

There were a number of things said that she couldn`t have possibly known, and 2 things in particular that were so specific it was unreal !! 

I wasn`t charged for the reading, she didn`t want paying.


----------



## kerilli (6 March 2013)

I have been absolutely at the end of my tether with a horse and resorted to using an animal communicator. I think there are some charlatans and some people with a genuine gift in this area, which I don't pretend to understand.
Have a read of this if you have 5 mins: 
http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/chapter-18-revealing-anne-kursinskis-secrets
Anne is a serious jockey, and I doubt she'd waste time or money (hers or the owners') on a load of total rubbish...   
Fwiw I got some very valuable insights into my horses. And since I spent my own money on it, and it did nobody and no horse any harm, what on earth has it got to do with anyone else?! (Also, another AC I tried was totally inaccurate about every horse and gave me a full refund without question. can't knock that.)


----------



## Booboos (6 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Hmm. Theres more to Life, the Universe and Everything than just the stuff you choose to believe in.

Just because it can't be proved.....doesn't prove anything.

Calm down dear

Click to expand...

Don't worry about me dear, irrationality does not fluster me, it's a professional hazard.

I don't randomnly chose my beliefs, I rely on reason. The problem with psychics is not just that their claims cannot be proven, but that they do not cohere with any of our other knowledge about the universe, they can't be replicated AND they can't be proven. Oh, also they are nonesense.


----------



## Firewell (6 March 2013)

I know why don't you hang them!!
You can all shout 'Witch Witch' and laugh as they swing around on the end of the noose. Then you can cheer and laugh some more and say snide remarks and look down on other peoples beliefs.
Oh except witch hunts were banned in the 1750's.. apart from on forums it would seem.
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, your adults not a pack of neanderthals. Wether you are for or against communicators there is never any need to belittle other people for what they think.

witch-hunt also witch hunt (wchhnt)
n.
An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views.


----------



## PandorasJar (6 March 2013)

kerilli said:



			Have a read of this if you have 5 mins: 
http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/chapter-18-revealing-anne-kursinskis-secrets
Anne is a serious jockey, and I doubt she'd waste time or money (hers or the owners') on a load of total rubbish...  

Click to expand...

A serious jockey is obviously a step saner than your average person?!

I doubt she is spending money on rubbish. I'd happily pay Derren Brown for what he does... he's very good at reading people and placing thoughts which in turn can have great results.

In a similar vein if someone can read a horse and owners body language and advise them accordingly of course it will have results. This doesn't prove that they can hear them saying they want to be a fireman though!

If it was as simple as a jockey believing making it so, there will probably be more than a handful of definite religions. Lots of doctors and lawyers and other rational people believe in a god of some form...


----------



## Flame_ (6 March 2013)

I can't believe I've not opened this thread before... A homophobic horse and a horse who wants to be a fireman? Epic!  Just when you thought you've heard everything HHO enlightens you once again. 



Booboos said:



			Imagine for a moment that you can communicate with animals, what would you do with this ability?

- you could help find all the stolen horses by just asking them where they are

- you could help avoid loads of welfare cases by having the horses report their owners straight to the welfare authorities

- you could have any horse involved in an accident give you the location of its unconscious rider

the list goes on. Instead you decide to charge people to tell them inanities - you are either a fraud or immoral.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is kind of where I stand on the whole mind reading, talking to the dead stuff, etc... It would be awesome if people could do it, the possibilities would be limitless. Yet these people just use their "powers" to chat on about favorite colours, wanting to be firemen, other random fluff, etc.

Saying that, I did try one through desperation and wanting to at least attempt open-mindedness. She was wildly inaccurate, but cost less than an inaccurate vet.


----------



## Hippona (6 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Don't worry about me dear, irrationality does not fluster me, it's a professional hazard.

I don't randomnly chose my beliefs, I rely on reason. The problem with psychics is not just that their claims cannot be proven, but that they do not cohere with any of our other knowledge about the universe, they can't be replicated AND they can't be proven. Oh, also they are nonesense.
		
Click to expand...

I dont just randomly chose my beliefs either....life experience shapes my attitudes towards certain things.

I am entitled to my opinions....as you are to yours.

I will not lower myself to rubbish you....


----------



## Booboos (6 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			I dont just randomly chose my beliefs either....life experience shapes my attitudes towards certain things.

I am entitled to my opinions....as you are to yours.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't said anything on this thread to suggest that I would challenge your right to have your own opinions. Having an opinion though does not equate with being right or other people agreeing with your opinion. My opinion is that your opinion is wrong, which is as valid an opinion as your original one.

If you chose to participate in a thread that discusses the lack of reasoning exhibited in believing in communicators you should not become upset at being challenged to justify your opinion.





Hippona said:



			I will not lower myself to rubbish you....

Click to expand...

I would hope not but I think the boat has sailed on this one.


----------



## Hippona (6 March 2013)

Lol.....I am not upset in the slightest.....

I never said that you implied I wasnt allowed an opinion.....however, your tone appeared fairly mocking....

Some people have had experiences, not necessarily with animal communicators...but with other so-called 'paranormal' or unexplainable phenomenon. Just because things cannot be proven, doesnt mean they don't happen or exist...

I am open to the idea that science cannot prove everything and that there is more to the world and logic, reason and rationale.... 

You quite obviously are not, which is fair enough....


----------



## Happy Horse (6 March 2013)

My Mum insisted on paying for Radionics for my horses melanomas.  I didn't believe a bit of it.  When he broke his leg I got her to ring them for an update, they said he was doing really well.  Needless to say she didn't pay them any longer!


----------



## JanetGeorge (6 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:






Still chuckling at the idea of a homophobic horse though. 

Click to expand...

Me too - as my senior rider is gay - and ALL my horses like him!  There are plenty of horses who don't like men, and plenty more who play up with women - but that is due to past experiences.  

And yes, horse communicators occasionally get it right - for all sorts of reasons.

The first is the likelihood of 'inside information' - they know someone who knows the horse/the horse's owner.

Then there are clues they pick up in what the owner says/how the horse reacts.  And of course, if they said, everytime,  "this horse doesn't like x" they'd get it right SOME of the time.  The people for whom they get it right are far more likely to talk about it than the owners who decide everything the communicator said was rubbish - and feels stupid for wasting their money!


----------



## 1stclassalan (6 March 2013)

kerilli said:



http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/chapter-18-revealing-anne-kursinskis-secrets
Anne is a serious jockey, and I doubt she'd waste time or money (hers or the owners') on a load of total rubbish...
		
Click to expand...

Tom Cruise is a Scientologist - Charlie Sheen is a 911 Conspiracist so being famous for one thing is plain no guarantee of sanity in another.

Anyone who looks at a horse's photograph and then purported to be able to "read" what it's thinking or can reveal hidden details of its past - is either making lucky guesses, tricking the gulible owner's into believing what they say has some merit - or it's part of an elaborate fraud - like spiritualism. 

I'm more than willing to bet that I could take some random photos of horses and these guys wouldn't even catch on the horses didn't belong to me - pm me anyone who wants to take me on. I won't be holding my breath.


----------



## 1stclassalan (6 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			I am open to the idea that science cannot prove everything ...
		
Click to expand...

Name me one thing that it can't. 

What every person who comes up with that old chestnut seems to forget is - in the entire history of man ( and woman ...oops) what we now call science has been employed to deduce how the world works and not one thing turned out to be MAGIC!




			and that there is more to the world and logic, reason and rationale....
		
Click to expand...

Read the first bit again. EVERYTHING is explainable by logic, reason and rationale - or else it is bunk! Scientific Laws and Theories are so good they can actually predict things that have not been discovered, co-incide with observably facts - all other forms of hokus-pocus seek to turn the flippin' clock back.




			...however, your tone appeared fairly mocking....
		
Click to expand...

My tone will remain completely mocking - because while it might be acceptable to have differing views on politics or the best colour of horse - it's entirely another matter to promote charlatan ideas and seek to establish credence for them. 

I am a member of the James Randi Foundation - they have been offering $1,000,000 to anyone who can prove clairvoyance, telepathy and communicating with dead people - for years without ANY takers let alone folk who've tried and failed.


----------



## FionaM12 (6 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			I think I actually have the gift. Does anyone on here have a bay horse? I'm getting a strong image of a bay in a field, he's telling me he would like more mollassed mixes, but knows you only restrict them for his own good. I'm also getting the vision of a brick building, & a shovel near-by, & some buckets too. The horse says he prefers rolling without a rug, & he remembers the time he farted whilst you were grooming. For anyone else wanting a reading, I can pm my paypal account.
		
Click to expand...

*OMG* Littlelegs that is _*amazing*_! I mean, it's so obviously Mollie, I can tell. Except she's a she... but still... everything else is just on the button! 

Oh but she doesn't wear a rug... still she's probably telling me she doesn't want to... Fantastic! What else does she say? 



*paypal account at the ready....*


----------



## Littlelegs (6 March 2013)

'he' was a typo, I meant she. Molly used to wear a rug, with a previous owner but is happier now she doesn't. She is also starting to lose her winter coat slightly. She tells me you once lost a hoofpick, although I'm not sure whether she is saying before or since you had her. She prefers carrots to wormer. And there's been a gelding she didn't like. There was also a chestnut mare in her life before you had her, either on the same yard or within a 40mile radius, & a shetland pony. She also is giving me the image of metal stirrup irons. Unfortunately my crystal ball drains the electric meter too much for me to be more specific without a payment.


----------



## Mr Nick (6 March 2013)

Firewell said:



			I know why don't you hang them!!
You can all shout 'Witch Witch' and laugh as they swing around on the end of the noose. Then you can cheer and laugh some more and say snide remarks and look down on other peoples beliefs.
Oh except witch hunts were banned in the 1750's.. apart from on forums it would seem.
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, your adults not a pack of neanderthals. Wether you are for or against communicators there is never any need to belittle other people for what they think.

witch-hunt also witch hunt (wchhnt)
n.
An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views.
		
Click to expand...

crikey Firewell thats a bit of an overreaction.  have a look at my original post - an animal  communicator told an owner her horse was homophobic.  Nobody wants hang anyone but surely that kind of attribution is worthy of comment and query?  

Now any communicators out there who could do a spot of equality and diversity training?


----------



## ebonyallen (6 March 2013)

Someone at our yard was told that their horse was afraid of the dark. Each to their own really.


----------



## Booboos (6 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Lol.....I am not upset in the slightest.....

I never said that you implied I wasnt allowed an opinion.....however, your tone appeared fairly mocking....

Some people have had experiences, not necessarily with animal communicators...but with other so-called 'paranormal' or unexplainable phenomenon. Just because things cannot be proven, doesnt mean they don't happen or exist...

I am open to the idea that science cannot prove everything and that there is more to the world and logic, reason and rationale.... 

You quite obviously are not, which is fair enough....
		
Click to expand...

My tone was not mocking, my tone was intellectually challenging. If I disagree with someone who takes part in a discussion I challenge their views and expect the same from them. If they provide good arguments I revise my views.

When someone claims to read a horse's mind I only have reason to rely upon to evaluate the claim. What is more plausible, 

that this person has a mystical ability that defies the laws of physics and logic, that cannot be replicated in experimental settings, that often results in mistakes and/or generalisations and can be easily explained through well known techniques for conning people, 

or that they are lying?

Reason suggests they are lying. What do you rely on to conclude that they have the mystical ability?


----------



## Goldenstar (6 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			My tone was not mocking, my tone was intellectually challenging. If I disagree with someone who takes part in a discussion I challenge their views and expect the same from them. If they provide good arguments I revise my views.

When someone claims to read a horse's mind I only have reason to rely upon to evaluate the claim. What is more plausible, 

that this person has a mystical ability that defies the laws of physics and logic, that cannot be replicated in experimental settings, that often results in mistakes and/or generalisations and can be easily explained through well known techniques for conning people, 

or that they are lying?

Reason suggests they are lying. What do you rely on to conclude that they have the mystical ability?
		
Click to expand...

I cannot explain the experiance I had , I have  thought about it a lot over the years and I can find no logical explanation .


----------



## Superhot (6 March 2013)

Just because someone can do something you can't explain, doesn't make it witchcraft, hocus pocus or anything else.  It just means you don't understand it.  Yes, there are charlatans, as there are in all walks of life, but don't deride what you can't explain.  If someone derives reassurance from a communicator, perhaps even peace from a communicator, is it so wrong, particularly if they don't get charged for the service?  I did go on a course to try and learn the skill, but when given a photo of a horse and asked what I could sense, I had to be totally honest and say nothing.  However, a few other students could  feel things, and when they talked about this, the owners of the animals would say whether or not they were right.  Very interesting...


----------



## Mr Nick (6 March 2013)

Superhot said:



			Just because someone can do something you can't explain, doesn't make it witchcraft, hocus pocus or anything else.  It just means you don't understand it.  Yes, there are charlatans, as there are in all walks of life, but don't deride what you can't explain.  If someone derives reassurance from a communicator, perhaps even peace from a communicator, is it so wrong, particularly if they don't get charged for the service?  I did go on a course to try and learn the skill, but when given a photo of a horse and asked what I could sense, I had to be totally honest and say nothing.  However, a few other students could  feel things, and when they talked about this, the owners of the animals would say whether or not they were right.  Very interesting...
		
Click to expand...

And that's called guessing. No?


----------



## Goldenstar (6 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			And that's called guessing. No?
		
Click to expand...

Well that's what I would say but in my experiance the person didnot know me lived a long way away and the thing she told me ( not to do woth the horse we discussed ) was so private it left me seriously spooked.


----------



## Littlelegs (6 March 2013)

For all I'm taking the mick, & I usually only go by scientific, logical explanations, I do actually believe psychic power exists, although I'm not sure what the scientific explanation is. I think its rare, & I also think its something hard to switch on & off at will. Otherwise things like missing children could be easily solved everytime. I do also think with animal communicators, even those who are genuinely gifted, its the owner they read, whether they realise it or not. I don't think its a magical, unexplainable gift. I think its more like the way most people 'just know' & pick up on things about their loved ones. Maybe combined with body language so subtle that no human really realises it exists. Like horses can say whole paragraphs to each other without obvious body language signals. Maybe people can also communicate whole paragraphs without speaking or any other obvious signals, but most of us just don't know how.


----------



## YorksG (6 March 2013)

Just another thought, over time there have been many things that have not been provable by 'science', but people had sufficiently open minds to explore the possibility that they may still be true. Until we had microscopes we could not proove the existance of microscopic animals, maybe we just haven't got the correct equipment for measure whatever forces may be there for long range communication to work. While I was sceptical about this I did have the strange experience myself, of 'seeing' the locations where the trauma happened, of childhood trauma survivors, before they described them to me. I have to say the first time that happened I was seriously spooked  I have now got used to it. I cannot proove that I do it, but both me and my clients know I can.


----------



## Goldenstar (6 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Just another thought, over time there have been many things that have not been provable by 'science', but people had sufficiently open minds to explore the possibility that they may still be true. Until we had microscopes we could not proove the existance of microscopic animals, maybe we just haven't got the correct equipment for measure whatever forces may be there for long range communication to work. While I was sceptical about this I did have the strange experience myself, of 'seeing' the locations where the trauma happened, of childhood trauma survivors, before they described them to me. I have to say the first time that happened I was seriously spooked  I have now got used to it. I cannot proove that I do it, but both me and my clients know I can.
		
Click to expand...

That's interesting,  I know ( whatever the doubters think ) that I never discussed any of my dead horses with this lady how she knew these details is just beyond me.


----------



## Superhot (6 March 2013)

Little legs, how can communicators read the owners when they don't always meet them?  They just send  a photo.  I agree about missing children.  I did ask a famous psychic about a missing child once, and her answer left me in no doubt she didn't really have a clue.  I remember a series on TV some years ago when they gave 6 or so mediums different tests to see if any of them really had the gift.  Anyone else remember it?


----------



## Flame_ (6 March 2013)

Goldenstar said:



			That's interesting,  I know ( whatever the doubters think ) that I never discussed any of my dead horses with this lady how she knew these details is just beyond me.
		
Click to expand...

Had you talked about your horses online? Maybe done any interviews about them? Had there ever been a magazine feature on your yard, even just a photo advert or something? Maybe you and she had some mutual connections? Could you have given her more clues when talking to her than you realized? 

Doesn't everybody watch the mentalist?  And surely telepathy with horses (especially dead ones  ) must be even harder than with people?


----------



## Trinity Fox (6 March 2013)

I have to say I am not a believer in this sort of thing, I was at a country show a couple of years ago and was at a stall that was quiet the people were nice and they flogged me a book about a guy who believed all horses were affected by past lives they had, I bought it really because I felt sorry for them and I like a read.
It was a good read funny and quite heart warming but a bit bonkers, it featured lot's of places local to me so I thought it a good purchase, said man was doing a talk as part of borders festival of the horse so we thought why not go and see him.

Well the book was a bit bonkers the talk was crazy I am talking goblins fairies and aliens , I did try and ask him a couple of sensible questions and he just never gave an answer just skirted round the question. I do think he believed what he was talking about, he was an elderly gentleman and had been involved in this sort of thing for many years but it was pretty loopy.
Most of the people there hung on his every word one woman asked what was wrong with her pony as it nipped the kid and was a little toad mmm try being stricter with it.
He was a really nice man and I think believed what he was saying but it was nuts, if you do like that sort of thing have a read of his book it is Nod whispers by peter Neilson, even if you don't it is worth a light read.


----------



## Ludi-doodi (6 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			how is it that normally sane and rational people let their reason go out of the window when it comes to horse communicators?

Now Ive heard about a lot of rubbish spouted by these people but one has told someone I know (and have a lot of respect for) that their horse is homophobic.  REally.  And I think she may be buying it.

Click to expand...


QR My horse was supposed to be Autistic according to the one and only reading I had done.  Laughed for ages about that one!!  I almost changed his name to Dustin Horseman after Rainman!


----------



## Flame_ (6 March 2013)

Superhot said:



			I remember a series on TV some years ago when they gave 6 or so mediums different tests to see if any of them really had the gift.  Anyone else remember it?
		
Click to expand...

I watched the BS detective, he was fab.  He got people to lie there while he healed them with crystals (which were sweets  ) and people kept agreeing with him how they were definitely working and they were feeling so much better. He also did mediums and put some BS back-story about someone being trampled to death by a horse and carriage at a hotel online. He got a medium in who started talking about it in the place it was supposed to have happened.


----------



## Goldenstar (6 March 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Had you talked about your horses online? Maybe done any interviews about them? Had there ever been a magazine feature on your yard, even just a photo advert or something? Maybe you and she had some mutual connections? Could you have given her more clues when talking to her than you realized? 

Doesn't everybody watch the mentalist?  And surely telepathy with horses (especially dead ones  ) must be even harder than with people? 

Click to expand...

No it was pre HHO when the ironing was done and the house was in order.
Honestly no one knew the thing she told me it was deeply disturbing , we only discussed one horse .
The spooky things she told me where about horses that where dead.


----------



## Littlelegs (6 March 2013)

Superhot, I assume the owner would have some form of communication with the psychic, even if just on the phone. Nearly every seemingly genuine story I've heard involves the communicator relating something the owner already knows, hence the proof its genuine. And I think they get that from the owner. Horses don't communicate in daily life with words we as humans use, so I don't see why they would psychically communicate with our words either. Eg a horse wouldn't think of a companion as 'the 15hh chestnut tb mare' or 'I don't enjoy 24/7 stabling'. Therefore I think it has to be the owner who is being read.


----------



## marvie (6 March 2013)

This is the most fun thread i have read in ages. Would love to hear more tales


----------



## Goldenstar (6 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			Superhot, I assume the owner would have some form of communication with the psychic, even if just on the phone. Nearly every seemingly genuine story I've heard involves the communicator relating something the owner already knows, hence the proof its genuine. And I think they get that from the owner. Horses don't communicate in daily life with words we as humans use, so I don't see why they would psychically communicate with our words either. Eg a horse wouldn't think of a companion as 'the 15hh chestnut tb mare' or 'I don't enjoy 24/7 stabling'. Therefore I think it has to be the owner who is being read.
		
Click to expand...

But how can someone who has never met someone know something that no one else knew something the person did alone , not linked to the horse that was discussed .
I can explain it I am sure If this person employed a detective they could have found out I had a grey and a chestnut who where PTS and the chestnut was going blind however whether it was  worth it for £ 50 when i did not ask about those horses But what I thought about sitting on a wall on my own that's what I can't explain.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (6 March 2013)

I have posted about this before, so some people may remember it but NO-ONE knew about the events before I posted.

My sister had some dealings with a horse communicator, as a favour to someone who needed 'subjects' that she didn't know.  After the initial session, the communicator updated sister with things that the horse had communicated to her from time to time.
Amongst other things, the communicator talked about 'the dog in the barrel'.  Sister couldn't really make any sense of that and forgot about it but the subject came up again, the barrel was blue, the horse, insistent.  After a while the dog was said to be laughing in the blue barrel.  When questioned further, the dog was described as a JRT.
Sister realised that the horse/communicator must be talking about the JRT which died in her sleep at home in the middle of  very cold winter.  We put the body into a blue barrel with a tight fitting lid and kept it in the yard until the weather warmed up enough  for us to be able to dig a hole and bury her.  We always used to describe this very cheerful little dog as laughing.
We had certainly not advertised the fact that we had a frozen dog's body in a barrel in our yard but the horse passed it every day going to and from the stable to the field.

We do not understand everything - if we did there would be nothing more to learn.  IMO the people who are most likely to discover new things are those with open minds.

  ETA As for the language used; I speak to my mare in English but she was brought up in Germany/Holland.   She seems to understand what I say, which is probably no surprise to any-one when I ask her to move over and accompany this with a push.  What takes a bit more explaining is how she knw what I meant the day I told her I was going to fill the filed water buckets and I would appreciate it if she would make sure that her compnions didn't come to 'help' as I didn't want to be squashed. That day she stood just inside the gate of the field where the herd was grazing, they didn't come past her into the other field where I was filling the trugs.  Since then I have deliberately not said anything about it before filling the trugs, she has been grazing at the other side of the field and the Appy has come to have a drink from the hose-pipe as I knew she would.  I imagine that  my mare 'read' the pictures in my mind as I was talking, as I really can't think that she truly understood the words.


----------



## Booboos (7 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger: I think the clue in your story is the bit where you say that your sister couldn't really make sense of that...until she did. The communicator told her something vague and general, your sister added in the details. It is an extremely well known phenomenon that we fill in our memories to make more sense of them and revise them in light of these new interpretations. Out of interest what was your horse's interest in the dog, why did he bring it up? I would imagine your horse would be astounded to come across a communicator who could talk to him directly and delighted at the opportunity to convey his thoughts back to you, after all with the best of intentions we do misunderstand our animals, so here was the opportunity to tell you everything he ever wanted...and he focused on a dog in a barrel. Why was he so interested in the dog? Did he tell you anything more pressing and (frankly) more interesting?

The sad thing about the whole business is that our brains are exceptionally interesting, complex and incredible all on their own. There is so much for us to study and marvel at as things stand with no reason to invent implausible 'abilities'.


----------



## RonnieHowe (7 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			one has told someone I know (and have a lot of respect for) that their horse is homophobic.  REally.  And I think she may be buying it.

Click to expand...

LOL this has made my day!!! Hilarious


----------



## FionaM12 (7 March 2013)

Sorry, but people who post an "amazing" account which happened to them are not likely to convince the rest of us.

We only have your word your account's true (and most of us don't know you). Also we're not likely to be convinced there wasn't some way the ac knew the info other than from the horse's mouth (as it were).

I will continue to believe it's nonsense unless it could be proved in the following way (or something similar):

A number of horses are chosen who we could be sure the ac knew nothing about (including who they belonged to).

Those horses' pasts were known (but obviously, not to the ac) or could be checked.

The ac could only "talk" to the horses not their handlers or owners.

If I was personally shown the the ac was able to communicate with the horses with astonishing accuracy under those circumstances I'd review my opinion.


----------



## margaretb (7 March 2013)

I had a communication done with P, initially nothing that was said seemed to have any relevance, the name Bonny kept cropping up, but I knew no-one of that name.  I then got in contact with the previous owner and she told me that they had had a pet lamb that used to graze with P, and it was called Bonny.

Each to their own, if you want to spend your money on such things then so be it.  I enjoyed my reading and it did help me with P.


----------



## Wagtail (7 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			Superhot, I assume the owner would have some form of communication with the psychic, even if just on the phone. Nearly every seemingly genuine story I've heard involves the communicator relating something the owner already knows, hence the proof its genuine. And I think they get that from the owner. Horses don't communicate in daily life with words we as humans use, so I don't see why they would psychically communicate with our words either. Eg a horse wouldn't think of a companion as 'the 15hh chestnut tb mare' or 'I don't enjoy 24/7 stabling'. Therefore I think it has to be the owner who is being read.
		
Click to expand...

Completely agree with this. I do believe in psychic ability, but it is the humans, not the horses that are being read.


----------



## Wagtail (7 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			I have posted about this before, so some people may remember it but NO-ONE knew about the events before I posted.

My sister had some dealings with a horse communicator, as a favour to someone who needed 'subjects' that she didn't know.  After the initial session, the communicator updated sister with things that the horse had communicated to her from time to time.
Amongst other things, the communicator talked about 'the dog in the barrel'.  Sister couldn't really make any sense of that and forgot about it but the subject came up again, the barrel was blue, the horse, insistent.  After a while the dog was said to be laughing in the blue barrel.  When questioned further, the dog was described as a JRT.
Sister realised that the horse/communicator must be talking about the JRT which died in her sleep at home in the middle of  very cold winter.  We put the body into a blue barrel with a tight fitting lid and kept it in the yard until the weather warmed up enough  for us to be able to dig a hole and bury her.  We always used to describe this very cheerful little dog as laughing.
		
Click to expand...

But that communicator would have been reading your sister, not the horse. You say yourself that 'we used to describe this very cheerful little dog as laughing'.

The horse does not understand such things. Even if you repeatedly talked about the dog as laughing in front of the horse (doubtful), the horse would not have a clue what you were talking about, and certainly would not then have been able to convey this to the communicator. If horses were able to do this, then we could simply do things such as explain how they should perform a passage, and then get on them and they would do it!


----------



## Littlelegs (7 March 2013)

Goldenstar, I'm not saying the communicator didn't genuinely pick something up, but I think it was you she communicated with, rather than the horse. 
  We also don't actually know enough about the human brain to discount or prove it. We all have things buried in our memories, or our subconscious that we remember if its triggered. And we accept its 'normal' to have minor psychic communication with a loved one, eg answering a question that hasn't been asked etc. So I don't see its impossible for a small minority to be perceptive enough to extend that to people they don't know well. 
  I do think the opportunity to blag it is quite high though, certainly to get away with it with someone who hasn't dealt/met with a range of horses. I'm sure many of us pick up lots from the body language of a horse & person interacting, & given the inclination could put together a reasonably accurate back story that would fit. Eg I once caught a very scared horse (owner fell, horse ran & jumped back into field in full tack with reins dangling at flat out gallop). On the surface, owner was doing the exact same as me, yet I caught it, she couldn't. Imo because whilst acting the part, the owner was subconsciously tense thinking 'omg, please let me catch you before you hurt yourself' whereas I wasn't emotionally involved to that degree & it was easier to genuinely believe I would get it before it got hurt. And it simply picked up on the very subtle body language. However I could have easily blagged it being some psychic connection, given that some non numpty bystanders actually thought it was anyway. Likewise I've easily handled supposedly difficult horses, or made the decision to buy them, based on the owners body language & therefore whether or not the horse actually had a major problem. Again, given the inclination it would be easy to make up a back story that fitted. 
  However, I do think its possible some people have a gift that as yet we can't explain.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Pearlsasinger: I think the clue in your story is the bit where you say that your sister couldn't really make sense of that...until she did. The communicator told her something vague and general, your sister added in the details. It is an extremely well known phenomenon that we fill in our memories to make more sense of them and revise them in light of these new interpretations. 


I'm sorry to contradict you, when you obviously have such fixed ideas but it was not my sister who added in the details, it was the horse/
communicator.  I would have expected someone who was just dropping things into a conversation to gloss quickly over anything which the owner didn't pick up on straight away but in fact this all happened over amatter of months.  There were many details far more relevant to the horse in early conversations but other things, not just the dog, were added later.  I can assure you that both sister and I understand a great deal about how the human mind works, we both have qualifications and experience in phsychology.   Howsever we do both keep open minds.


The sad thing about the whole business is that our brains are exceptionally interesting, complex and incredible all on their own. There is so much for us to study and marvel at as things stand with no reason to invent implausible 'abilities'.
		
Click to expand...


I find the sad thing is that some people are unaware of how much we do not know about how the brain works and have very fixed ideas based on the little that we have found out so far.  IME the people who contribute most to the human race are those swho recognise that they do not know everything and are prepared to learn/discover new things, as the scientists in history did.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

ETA, the communicator was not reading my sister, this was done by email.  The communicator was sent a photo and no further details.  Incidentally no money changed hands.


----------



## kerilli (7 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Pearlsasinger: I think the clue in your story is the bit where you say that your sister couldn't really make sense of that...until she did. The communicator told her something vague and general, your sister added in the details. It is an extremely well known phenomenon that we fill in our memories to make more sense of them and revise them in light of these new interpretations. Out of interest what was your horse's interest in the dog, why did he bring it up? I would imagine your horse would be astounded to come across a communicator who could talk to him directly and delighted at the opportunity to convey his thoughts back to you, after all with the best of intentions we do misunderstand our animals, so here was the opportunity to tell you everything he ever wanted...and he focused on a dog in a barrel. Why was he so interested in the dog? Did he tell you anything more pressing and (frankly) more interesting?
		
Click to expand...

This does make me laugh.
So, because Pearlsasinger recounts a very very specific and utterly bizarre story, one which you really couldn't make up imho, and which only 2 people in the world knew about at the time, you disbelieve it.
But if she'd said totally typical stuff, the sort you might expect a horse to say (if you'd believe it ever could) - and of course that is assuming we have ANY clue at all of what is important in a horse's mind - if she'd said
"the AC said he wants more hay and more attention and more food, he likes the field with lots of grass, and please give him more massages and less work" 
or the sort of thing we'd guess a horse would ask for...
then I'm sure you'd all be crowing "well, anyone could have said that!" 
Basically, nothing could possibly convince you... fair enough. Enjoy your closed minds.

I have heard stories elsewhere of horses commenting on the colours of things. A blue water tub. The purple thing on the wall mentioned earlier. Maybe they particularly notice plastic things like that, since they are so unnatural. I would imagine the blue barrel got a bit stinky (sorry Pearl!) so it would be something a horse might comment on, if it could!

And as we know, horses are stoics. Unless they are starving, I don't think they mention food, or all the things that we as humans are fixated on. They expect to find their food at their feet, etc etc. None of mine, in any reading, has ever mentioned food, or the day-to-day stuff. (other than the strength of the electric fencing here, which apparently merited a very acerbic remark!)
It is very difficult not to anthropomorphise, obviously. 
They comment on things which are quite bizarre, but which obviously interest or puzzle them. Some have a real sense of humour. 
*shrugs* I don't care what you think of me, or my decision to occasionally spend money on this... I 100% believe there are some people with this gift, and it can be a HUGE help.


----------



## Littlelegs (7 March 2013)

Whilst its no less psychic to pick up a humans thoughts than a horses, I do think if its possible to read a horse from a photo, its more likely to be picking up the person whose handled the photos thoughts. I think to be convinced its the horse rather than the person whose being read, you would have to have an unknown third party take a picture & only relay the reading back to the owner after its complete. Preferably a non horsey person who won't even have random thoughts such as 'chestnut, one white sock, probably a tbx, in full work by the topline' etc whilst they are taking the picture. Eg getting my non-horsey friend to drive 5miles, photo the first horse she sees, & only after the reading track down the owner to verify it. And because I guess genuinely psychic people do sometimes draw a complete blank, it would need to be a handful of random horses.


----------



## FionaM12 (7 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			I am a member of the James Randi Foundation - they have been offering $1,000,000 to anyone who can prove clairvoyance, telepathy and communicating with dead people - for years without ANY takers let alone folk who've tried and failed.
		
Click to expand...

Good point. Why doesn't one of these psychic communicators collect the cash?

I also remember one of the big tv documentary programs about 10 years ago offering a huge reward for anyone who could prove homeopathy worked. Some came forward and tried, but it couldn't be proven.

There are things I'd really LIKE to believe in, but I can't when they can't be shown to be true.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (7 March 2013)

A few years ago, on another forum, a poster who practised Reiki, offered to do readings from photo's. 
 My dog was very ill and on the Sunday I decided that he would have to be PTS the next morning. I really wanted to old lad to die naturally rather than have to get the vet to euthanize him. It was a decision that was heart breaking.

I sent the woman a photo of him and just told her that he was very ill and would be PTS. She said she would, via the photo, do a session at 8pm.

I'd forgotten the time and was sitting at the table when the dog got up and lay by my feet, which was strange as he would never lie there. I looked at the clock, it was a few minutes after 8pm.

At 11.30pm, his breathing became distressed so I carried him to the car to travel to the emergency vet. As we drew into the car park, he died. I was spared the decision of taking his life.

Coincidence ? Quite possibly.

The Reiki woman sent me an email with all sorts of information about him that was totally characteristic but nothing a clever person couldn't hazard a guess at, except for one thing.
 Finn, had told her how thankful he was about my patience at toilet training and how he and the little black dog had sorted it.
 That didn't make any sense as neither he or the black dog was ever a problem. 
 Some months later it dawned on me, he was referring to my daughters puppy, who was a complete nightmare to toilet train. A stressed animal, she would mess all over the kitchen constantly, empty the bin and shred the contents etc etc. 
 I knew the little dog was neurotic and telling her off would increase her stress, so she was never told off. The mess was quietly cleared up and training continued. 
 One day, she messed on my new carpet at the top of the stairs. I looked at her and sighed' Oh, how could you ?'
 Little black dog and Finn, 2 very docile dogs, suddenly leapt at her and without leaving a mark, pinned her to the floor.
 She never, ever messed anywhere again.

I often thought how clever my 2 other dogs were to toilet train the puppy, but I'd never imagined that Finn would be aware of, or recall my patience with her. 

How would the Reiki woman have known ?


----------



## Serephin (7 March 2013)

I prefer to have an open mind.  

It is sheer arrogance, or perhaps fear, to imagine you understand everything on heaven and earth, a condition that the human race constantly suffers for.


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

There has been a study shown that human nature is that we play along with the herd. We don't want to be the ones that are different. One experiment was to ask a group of 6 strangers questions. 5 of the group were stooges. They all started giving obviously wrong answers to the questions. They all gave the same answer so the 6th person always gave the same answer as well. Even though they admitted when interviewed afterwards that deep down they knew it was wrong!
Add in a hefty emotional (we all want to think we are doing the very best for our horses) & financial investment and....BOOM you have someone ripe for cold reading.

Don't forget human memory is a very clever thing. We can process millions & millions bits of information without it really registering until something jogs us to remember something. So the thing is how these readings are recalled by 'believers are very different to how they actually happened. 

Re: the dog in the barrel. I would bet it went actually something like this:
'He's telling me about a dog. It was in something. Could it be a box? A bucket? A water trough? A barrel? (Owner responds enthusiastically to barrel because suddenly they remember the dead dog)
It was a fairly small dog (would have to be to fit in a barrel, no?) owner confirms it it was a Jack Russell.
Ah yes, he's telling me it was always a happy little thing (well have you ever seen a miserable Jack Russell) 

The telling thing is I believe the punter is turning the information to fit the memory in their head....but that first statement 'He's telling me about a dog that was in something' could be fitted to almost any dog memory & if it doesn't then you keep looking until you find a memory it does fit eg) the punter who called the old owner & found out about the sheep. 

If you want to believe (& if you have paid for it then even if you claim to be sceptic then you arent  )then you will find a way to believe


----------



## YorksG (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			There has been a study shown that human nature is that we play along with the herd. We don't want to be the ones that are different. One experiment was to ask a group of 6 strangers questions. 5 of the group were stooges. They all started giving obviously wrong answers to the questions. They all gave the same answer so the 6th person always gave the same answer as well. Even though they admitted when interviewed afterwards that deep down they knew it was wrong!
Add in a hefty emotional (we all want to think we are doing the very best for our horses) & financial investment and....BOOM you have someone ripe for cold reading.

Don't forget human memory is a very clever thing. We can process millions & millions bits of information without it really registering until something jogs us to remember something. So the thing is how these readings are recalled by 'believers are very different to how they actually happened. 

Re: the dog in the barrel. I would bet it went actually something like this:
'He's telling me about a dog. It was in something. Could it be a box? A bucket? A water trough? A barrel? (Owner responds enthusiastically to barrel because suddenly they remember the dead dog)
It was a fairly small dog (would have to be to fit in a barrel, no?) owner confirms it it was a Jack Russell.
Ah yes, he's telling me it was always a happy little thing (well have you ever seen a miserable Jack Russell) 

The telling thing is I believe the punter is turning the information to fit the memory in their head....but that first statement 'He's telling me about a dog that was in something' could be fitted to almost any dog memory & if it doesn't then you keep looking until you find a memory it does fit eg) the punter who called the old owner & found out about the sheep. 

If you want to believe (& if you have paid for it then even if you claim to be sceptic then you arent  )then you will find a way to believe
		
Click to expand...


Right as the person who was at the centre of the dog in the barrel story, let me set you straight there. The communicator mentioned a dog in a barrel at least three times in seperate 'conversations', each time I told her, quite honestly, that I had no idea what she was talking about. On the last time it was mentioned, she said, "it must be real, as the horse has kept going on about it, the barrel is blue and the dog is a JRT who is laughing" There was no input from me, as I honestly did not have a clue what she was talking about until she said that sentence. Then I remembered that we had in deed stored the body, until the ground was unfrozen, in a blue barrel on the yard. I am well aware of the studies about 'herd' mentality, it informs such notions as 'risky shift' in offending behaviour etc. However it has no bearing whatsover in this instance.


----------



## kerilli (7 March 2013)

also, glamourpuss, we don't all play along with the herd...    I don't know what to call your assumptions in that post, without being rude, so I apologise in advance, but they sound rather arrogant, insulting, and small-minded to me.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (7 March 2013)

My reading was done in an email, there was no input about the toilet training or the other dogs. 

I am aware of studies done like the example Glamourpuss mentions, and yes, it is a phenomenon of human nature, but not everything can be explained away by people being gullible.


----------



## Caol Ila (7 March 2013)

I had one AC tell me that the reason my horse developed separation anxiety in relation to her grey Connie-X neighbour was that the horse reminded her of her mother.  My horse was 17 or 18 at the time (and she would have been weaned at what?  six to eight months?) and I know for a fact that her mother was a bay TB.  

There was me thinking it was because my horse and the Connie-X were the only two horses in that barn.  The problem went away when all 16 horses at the yard were moved to one American-style barn.

Another AC gave me more of a mix of accurate and inaccurate information.  For example, she went on for a while about my horse's obsession with routine, which was spot-on, but also talked about how we had "recently" taken up dressage.  Er...  I bought that horse 13 years ago as a dressage horse and we have done ever since.  

I continue to experiment.  I have heard other accounts where the AC had specific, accurate information, which were far more convincing than my own experience, where the information was sometimes correct, but vague and general enough to describe a lot of horses.


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

YorksG it does sound like an intriguing reading. 

I apologise if my post comes across as arrogant. I have based it on the readings I have personally witnessed. As with anything in life I base my opinions on my experiences. My experiences have made me a disbeliever in this type of thing because I have come across more evidence for it being a farce than I have for it being correct.

Kerilli I certainly don't mean the 'following the herd' to be an insult, it's just human nature.
The experiment I mentioned was a version of this www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/i-cant-believe-my-eyes-conforming-to.php


----------



## Booboos (7 March 2013)

"An open mind" is a mind open to reason, to persuasion by valid arguments, it's not a mind that simply accepts everything it comes across no matter how incredulous.

Here's an open mind suggestion for you: I can see invisible, flying pigs. They come from space and their mission is to frighten horses. Perfectly well behaved horses get attacked by these invisible flying pigs and go bonkers. Their poor owners have no idea what is happening. If you look on HHO there are loads of threads by concerned owners wondering why their horses are going bonkers for no good reason - it's the invisible, flying pigs that only I and the horses can see. So there you go, a nice explanation which you should accept if you have an open mind.


----------



## Booboos (7 March 2013)

YorksG how did your horse explain its obsession with the dog in the barrel? Presumably the horse must have been astounded to suddenly have someone it could communicate with. Did the horse explain why the main thing it wanted to convey to you was that there was a dog in a barrel? Did the horse explain why it spent its time with the communicator repeatedly bringing up the dog in the barrel? (I won't ask how the horse was able to see blue as that has not gone down well earlier in the thread!)


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			YorksG how did your horse explain its obsession with the dog in the barrel? Presumably the horse must have been astounded to suddenly have someone it could communicate with. Did the horse explain why the main thing it wanted to convey to you was that there was a dog in a barrel? Did the horse explain why it spent its time with the communicator repeatedly bringing up the dog in the barrel? (I won't ask how the horse was able to see blue as that has not gone down well earlier in the thread!)
		
Click to expand...

I am beginning to understand the closed mind now.  It is closed even to the written word, its owner reads only what s/he wants to see on the page.

As has been explained more than once on this thread, the horse had several opportunities to communicate with the person concerned and took full advantage of them.  The dog was very small part of the communications and arose several weeks into the process.

I will also say that having read many posts on many subjects by some of the people who believe the evidence that their horses have indeed communicated with a 3rd party, I would not have thought of Goldenstar, Kerilli or Horserider if someone asked me to name gullible HHO members.  They have all struck me as sensible, experienced horsewomen who usually appear to know what they are talking about, even if I do not agree with their viewpoints on all occasions.

Glamourpuss, you've lost your bet - perhaps you would like to send your stake to HAPPA.


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

There has been reams & reams of psychological studies which can be used to explain Animal communication. You only need to read about the Forer effect, confirmation bias, fallacy of incomplete evidence & cold reading to see why I'm a disbeliever.
You may call it small minded, I would actually argue that considering research  is much more open minded  
Ah well


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

I have lost no such bet. There is no evidence to support the story of what the AC said. 
There is plenty of evidence of cold reading.

I actually don't think that someone who falls for cold reading is gullible at all, it's a highly sophisticated art.....I've actually had it done to me & was AMAZED at the 'accuracies'.....until I thought about it a little more


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			I have lost no such bet. There is no evidence to support the story of what the AC said. 
There is plenty of evidence of cold reading.

I actually don't think that someone who falls for cold reading is gullible at all, it's a highly sophisticated art.....I've actually had it done to me & was AMAZED at the 'accuracies'.....until I thought about it a little more 

Click to expand...

Do tell us your evidence of this cold reading of YorksG, who was at the other end of an email and who certainly didn't have any conversation similar to the one you postulated.

I'm not sure that arrogant even begins to describe your attitude.


----------



## Hippona (7 March 2013)

At one point....most people believed the world to be round.
One day....someone proved that it wasnt.
Bet there was a bit of foot shuffling that day.
Just because we dont have a method of proving things at this current time.....doesnt make them not true. It makes them unproven at this time....
There is no hard evidence either way......no-one is right no matter how hard you shout.
Cant prove it can be done, cant prove it cant. What we are left with is personal experience and belief


----------



## Littlelegs (7 March 2013)

To clarify, when I've been saying its the owner being read, not the horse, I don't mean a cold, fake reading, I do believe a small minority are genuinely psychic. I simply mean the psychic communication is with the owner, not horse.


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger I really don't understand where this arrogant label is coming from. 
Cold reading is a fact. It has been proven time & time again. Do I think that YorksG reading was a cold reading, yes I do, because although I wasn't there I have read enough about some of the research into human psychology to allow me to form an opinion. 
My other opinion is The plural of anecdote is not fact. People can tell me they saw, heard, dreamt whatever they like, I have a tendency to believe the published research.

Do I want to believe in animal communicators & psychics?...if I'm totally honest with myself, yes I do. I would love nothing more than to have someone contact my darling grandfather just so I could tell him one last time that I love him but I cannot believe in it, for me the evidence is stacked too much against it. If this makes me arrogant [shrug] then so be it.

You are totally free to carry your own beliefs, I absolutely respect that. 
Again YorksG is free to have her own beliefs. I'm sure she is absolutely happy with what the AC told her so why start getting so hostile towards what a stoopid Internet random is writing?


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Re: the dog in the barrel. I would bet it went actually something like this:
'He's telling me about a dog. It was in something. Could it be a box? A bucket? A water trough? A barrel? (Owner responds enthusiastically to barrel because suddenly they remember the dead dog)
It was a fairly small dog (would have to be to fit in a barrel, no?) owner confirms it it was a Jack Russell.
Ah yes, he's telling me it was always a happy little thing (well have you ever seen a miserable Jack Russell)
		
Click to expand...




glamourpuss said:



			Pearlsasinger I really don't understand where this arrogant label is coming from. 
Cold reading is a fact. It has been proven time & time again. Do I think that YorksG reading was a cold reading, yes I do, because although I wasn't there I have read enough about some of the research into human psychology to allow me to form an opinion. 
it.
		
Click to expand...


Cold reading is indeed a fact but it DID NOT happen in this case.  You are not the only one who wasn't there.  The only person who was there was the communicator.  She did whatever she did with the photograph provided and then emailed her 'findings' to YorksG.  YorksG thanked her and conveyed the message to me, we were both very surprised by the things that the communicator was able to tell us about that horse and others that we had owned at various times.  
The communicator got in touch by email at subsequent times to tell YorksG that the horse had contacted her again (no, I don't know how it works).  On more than one occasion the dog in the barrel was mentioned, on each occasion YorksG said she really didn't know what the horse was 'talking' about. Eventually the communicator gave more details, as above.  At no point did the communicator read any body language (unless she has skills with psychic readings of humans which she doesn't advertise) and she definitely didn't get any feedback about the dog which allowed her to narrow down a wild guess.  So I'm afraid you lost your bet there was no conversation such as the one you postulated.
The arrogance comes across in your posting style, where you refuse to acknowledge what others have said.


----------



## Booboos (7 March 2013)

Why would anyone be offended and insulted at being called human and fallible? The fundamental attribution error, the gambler's fallacy and out tendencies to be influenced by the behaviour of others are part of who we are as a species and not insults to anyone's intelligence in the same way that optical illusions are part of how we see.

Hippona: are you seriously suggesting that the earth does not actually have a shape and that it's shape changes with whatever we happen to believe it is so that there will never be any decent evidence as to its actual shape?


----------



## YorksG (7 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Why would anyone be offended and insulted at being called human and fallible? The fundamental attribution error, the gambler's fallacy and out tendencies to be influenced by the behaviour of others are part of who we are as a species and not insults to anyone's intelligence in the same way that optical illusions are part of how we see.

Hippona: are you seriously suggesting that the earth does not actually have a shape and that it's shape changes with whatever we happen to believe it is so that there will never be any decent evidence as to its actual shape?
		
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the earth is an ovid, with flattened 'points' at the poles, therefore it is not 'round' like a football, which was the belief after the earth was proven not to be flat. No the earths shape is not fluid, but our understanding of it perhaps needs to be a little so.


----------



## Hippona (7 March 2013)

Sorry....i was cooking when I typed that. Meant to say......people believed the world to be FLAT.....and that you dropped off the edge. One day it was proved otherwise.....the world didnt change shape with the proving of it.....it always was so.....
So the point being.....someday certain things may be proved. Because there is no proof right now doesnt mean there never will be. 
I have had certain experiences....I cannot prove them to you, and by the same token you certainly cannot prove they didnt.


----------



## horsesatemymoney (7 March 2013)

Nicnac said:



			Ha you remembered my fireman story.  To give the background it was my farrier at a training yard where one of the lady owners decided to get the 'Horse whisperer' in to find out why her horse wasn't winning.  She got the answer 

Click to expand...

That fireman story is one of my all time HHO favourites


----------



## Regandal (7 March 2013)

A lady I work with is a "medium".  She regularly startles us by announcing various people are in the room.  A few years ago she "saw" a man standing behind me holding a horse, and was insistent that he was a relative.  No way, no horsey peeps in my very working class ancestry.  Whilst discussing the horse meat scandal with my eldest brother last week, he mentioned that our grandfather, who I can't remember, had loved horses since working with them in the first world war.  He rode postillion on a gun carriage.  It's very seductive to believe, and I usually swither...........


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

Hippona, you are right they may be a point at which psychic readings are proven by scientific fact. That would be amazing.
As yet there is no proof. In fact the only proof is that a person can appear to give psychic readings & communicate with animals using other psychological methods such as using Barnum statements. 
Still to this day the £1,000,000 on offer for proving someone has a psychic skill still remains unclaimed! 
These are facts. 
To believe in anything else is similar to still believing the earth is flat!

Pearlsasinger nothing you are saying is convincing me that this Animal Communicator was actually reading the horse's mind. I think that it can still be explained. You are saying you have proved it but you haven't done anything of the sort you've just got angry because I refuse to accept an anecdotal account as hard evidence! 
You say you've proved she communicated with the horse so PLEASE send your animal communicator friend to the James Randi foundation immediately to claim her $1,000,000 as soon as she is paid I will accept that I have lost 'the bet'


----------



## Hippona (7 March 2013)

Actually....i would be one of those who would have been ridiculed for believing the world was round. The world being flat was an accepted "fact" at one point. 
Turned out to be not actually fact at all........


----------



## YorksG (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Hippona, you are right they may be a point at which psychic readings are proven by scientific fact. That would be amazing.
As yet there is no proof. In fact the only proof is that a person can appear to give psychic readings & communicate with animals using other psychological methods such as using Barnum statements. 
Still to this day the £1,000,000 on offer for proving someone has a psychic skill still remains unclaimed! 
These are facts. 
To believe in anything else is similar to still believing the earth is flat!

Pearlsasinger nothing you are saying is convincing me that this Animal Communicator was actually reading the horse's mind. I think that it can still be explained. You are saying you have proved it but you haven't done anything of the sort you've just got angry because I refuse to accept an anecdotal account as hard evidence! 
You say you've proved she communicated with the horse so PLEASE send your animal communicator friend to the James Randi foundation immediately to claim her $1,000,000 as soon as she is paid I will accept that I have lost 'the bet'
		
Click to expand...

I can't speak for pearlsasinger, but I am annoyed that you have consistantly suggested that I am a liar. All so you can demonstrate your supposed superiority. Yes this annecdotal, by definition, we were not at the time interested in whether other believed it or not (still aren't tbh) so setting up double blinds and testing were not things we were likely to do. 
Your solid mindset may change as you get older, as the world is full of things that on the surface may not appear to be likely.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Re: the dog in the barrel. I would bet it went actually something like this:
'He's telling me about a dog. It was in something. Could it be a box? A bucket? A water trough? A barrel? (Owner responds enthusiastically to barrel because suddenly they remember the dead dog)
It was a fairly small dog (would have to be to fit in a barrel, no?) owner confirms it it was a Jack Russell.
Ah yes, he's telling me it was always a happy little thing (well have you ever seen a miserable Jack Russell)
		
Click to expand...




glamourpuss said:



			Pearlsasinger nothing you are saying is convincing me that this Animal Communicator was actually reading the horse's mind. I think that it can still be explained. You are saying you have proved it but you haven't done anything of the sort you've just got angry because I refuse to accept an anecdotal account as hard evidence! 
You say you've proved she communicated with the horse so PLEASE send your animal communicator friend to the James Randi foundation immediately to claim her $1,000,000 as soon as she is paid I will accept that I have lost 'the bet'
		
Click to expand...

I did NOT say that I had proved anything.  I said that you had lost the bet about a conversation that you thought must have taken place when in actual fact no conversation at all had taken place.
I couldn't actually give a toss about what you believe but I would like you to acknowledge that you were wrong about the conversation and put your money where your mouth was!


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

YorksG you misunderstand me at no point am I calling you a liar! Absolutely not!! I think you are relaying the event exactly as you remember it happening. I am just saying that I believe that the communicators skill is not being able to communicate with animals but can be attributed to something much more scientific. My opinion.

I doubt my opinion will change as I get older [laughs like a drain] I'm bloody ancient now 

I have attended a psychic reading. I was amazed at the things the person knew about me. I raved about the information given to me. It wasn't until I learnt about the pyschological techniques used that I realised that actually what had happened was nothing more than a very accurate cold reading & me, subconsciously, filling in the gaps. 
I actually don't think that all Animal Communicators or psychics are charlatans out to rip off Joe public. I think some have an amazing talent for reading people, fishing, use of negative phraseology that is inate to them so they honestly believe they are communicating with the dead/animals.


----------



## YorksG (7 March 2013)

You have implied several times, including in your last reply that I am at best unable to remember conversations, at worst deliberatly giving misinformation. Either you can't read acurately, or you refuse to acknowlege anything which does not support your point of view.


----------



## glamourpuss (7 March 2013)

YorksG I have just had toread through my replies & I still don't understand why this hostility towards my responses. I honestly cannot see where I am implying you are deliberating giving misinformation. I speak of human nature, of phenomenon which all people are susceptible to....me included!! 
You are saying that I refuse to acknowledge anything that does not support my point of view. Isn't that what believing in something is? 
The difference is my 'belief' is supported by proven research whereas yours......?

Anyhoo I'm off to bed. Sweet dreams


----------



## YorksG (7 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			YorksG I have just had toread through my replies & I still don't understand why this hostility towards my responses. I honestly cannot see where I am implying you are deliberating giving misinformation. I speak of human nature, of phenomenon which all people are susceptible to....me included!! 
You are saying that I refuse to acknowledge anything that does not support my point of view. Isn't that what believing in something is? 
The difference is my 'belief' is supported by proven research whereas yours......?

Anyhoo I'm off to bed. Sweet dreams
		
Click to expand...

How does your 'cold reading' fit with an e-mail conversation, where I stated several times that I did not know what the dog in the barrel meant? How do you suggest that some one can cold read, I do not know what you are talking about. Admittedly you appear to not know what I am talking about, and I am stating it clearly and have done throughout the thread. You believe I am a gullible idiot, you have no proof of this, scientific or otherwise, well fancy that.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (7 March 2013)

So I take it you are not prepared to stand by your bet, Glamourpuss.  HAPPA's loss then.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Actually....i would be one of those who would have been ridiculed for believing the world was round. The world being flat was an accepted "fact" at one point. 
Turned out to be not actually fact at all........ 

Click to expand...

At the heart of scientific inquiry is always the possibility of revising what we previously thought was truth, but still none of this equates to accepting just about anything as truth. Retaining the possibility that one has made a mistake is one thing, accepting absolutely anything as true because of the possibility of having made a mistake is another.

There are these major differences between how we go about thinking about the shape of the earth that simply do not apply to psychics:

1. We may have thought the earth was flat and then round and then eliptical but each time there was good reason for thinking this (e.g. flat: look we are not falling off the earth, round: look there is a solar system that accounts for gravity so we don't fall off a ball, etc.)

2. This reason could be verified by a number of ways both theoretical arguments and applied ones. Over time the arguments have changed in light of new knowledge but at the time, given what we knew, they were convincing. This is different from saying "there are no arguments, this is not convincing in any way now, but accept it as true anyway".

3. The account of the shape of the earth fits in with our general understanding of physical laws and doesn't violate any of them. It makes sense along everything else we currently know.

4. The arguments for the shape of the earth are open to scientific experimentation, replication, dissemination, challenge and eventually revision in light of new facts. They are not "inexplicable, you could never understand what I am doing because you don't have an open mind and I am too insulted to give an account of what I am doing, or ever replicated in laboratory conditions because you are being mean by challenging me". In fact the times where you get the worst accounts of the shape of the earth (the least close to the truth) are times when scientific inquiry was denigrated and ideas were accepted on faith rather than reason (e.g. the ancient Greeks with their exceptional astrology skills though the earth was spherical, it was the Medieval Christians that imposed the flat earth idea).

Psychics meet none of these requirements and the claim that people can 'read' animal minds is not like saying we thought the earth was flat but now we think it is eliptical, but rather equivalent to saying that the shape of the earth is "the sound oooomphffpt" (i.e. nonesensical in every way).


----------



## MerrySherryRider (8 March 2013)

Me, I don't believe in Scientists, they get it wrong so many times.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

YorksG and Pearlsinger could we please see the e-mail? Perhaps we will be as astounded as you by it and we'll all be converted.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Me, I don't believe in Scientists, they get it wrong so many times.
		
Click to expand...

You are in good company with the Creationists, the Scientologists and the Climate Change deniers.


----------



## Gloi (8 March 2013)

Having an open mind is one thing, but it shouldn't be so open that your brain falls out.


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Booboos I think I actually love you.

Pearlsasinger I've just seen your repeated claims about 'the bet' firstly I was under the impression that I was just using a turn of phrase. Hence the use of 'I would bet' there was no mention of a stake - 
Also if we are really getting into the semantics of what I have relayed I did say that the conversation went *something* like. The email 'conversation' may well have gone something like that.
I have tried to be reasoned, I have clearly stated that these are my opinions & that I respect your opinions. I have stated that I don't think you are lying. I have never referred to you or implied that you are a gullible idiot - these are all accusations that you have somehow plucked from my postings. Postings that I have reread &, if I'm honest, I cannot see what you are getting so defensive about. 
I will repeat it again. I do not think you you are lying or providing an incorrect account. However I do not think the person communicated with your horse, I believe they used other psychological methods which have been proven by research.
If the way I phrased my initial post has offended you then I do apologise for that but I do not apologise for having a different opinion or belief to you.


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Horserider that's the beauty of science. Sometimes scientists do get it wrong but a good scientist learns from mistakes & amends theories when presented with evidence.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			. However I do not think the person communicated with your horse, I believe they used other psychological methods which have been proven by research.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Before handing over any money to these "readers" and snake oil salesmen - just ask them if they would be prepared to take up the $1,000,000 challenge - I'm almost willing to bet another $1,000,000 that any of them would say - ah, I'm afraid it doesn't work like that."


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Booboos I think I actually love you.
		
Click to expand...

Ah welcome to a miniscule but very select club!


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Horserider that's the beauty of science. Sometimes scientists do get it wrong but a good scientist learns from mistakes & amends theories when presented with evidence.
		
Click to expand...

It's not just the good scientists - it's the very foundation of science. To observe, form a theory - test that theory and see if it holds good in all cases and then modify the theory until it models reality by repeatable experiment.

Modern day Conspiracy is mostly made up of people who don't understand how most things work and are ignorant of Physics and Chemistry - therefore they are prime material for outlandish suggestions simply because the reasons behind the Conspiracy suits - rather like religion!


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			Modern day Conspiracy is mostly made up of people who don't understand how most things work and are ignorant of Physics and Chemistry - therefore they are prime material for outlandish suggestions simply because the reasons behind the Conspiracy suits - rather like religion!
		
Click to expand...

There is some really interesting research on how the proliferation of ideas via the internet has actually resulted in people who will believe anything as they lack the skills (and will?) to critically assess the source of the information. Have you come across the tree-octopus study?


----------



## Hippona (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			At the heart of scientific inquiry is always the possibility of revising what we previously thought was truth, but still none of this equates to accepting just about anything as truth. Retaining the possibility that one has made a mistake is one thing, accepting absolutely anything as true because of the possibility of having made a mistake is another.

There are these major differences between how we go about thinking about the shape of the earth that simply do not apply to psychics:

1. We may have thought the earth was flat and then round and then eliptical but each time there was good reason for thinking this (e.g. flat: look we are not falling off the earth, round: look there is a solar system that accounts for gravity so we don't fall off a ball, etc.)

2. This reason could be verified by a number of ways both theoretical arguments and applied ones. Over time the arguments have changed in light of new knowledge but at the time, given what we knew, they were convincing. This is different from saying "there are no arguments, this is not convincing in any way now, but accept it as true anyway".

3. The account of the shape of the earth fits in with our general understanding of physical laws and doesn't violate any of them. It makes sense along everything else we currently know.

4. The arguments for the shape of the earth are open to scientific experimentation, replication, dissemination, challenge and eventually revision in light of new facts. They are not "inexplicable, you could never understand what I am doing because you don't have an open mind and I am too insulted to give an account of what I am doing, or ever replicated in laboratory conditions because you are being mean by challenging me". In fact the times where you get the worst accounts of the shape of the earth (the least close to the truth) are times when scientific inquiry was denigrated and ideas were accepted on faith rather than reason (e.g. the ancient Greeks with their exceptional astrology skills though the earth was spherical, it was the Medieval Christians that imposed the flat earth idea).

Psychics meet none of these requirements and the claim that people can 'read' animal minds is not like saying we thought the earth was flat but now we think it is eliptical, but rather equivalent to saying that the shape of the earth is "the sound oooomphffpt" (i.e. nonesensical in every way).
		
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is......again....we do not have the wherewithall to prove any of these claims RIGHT NOW.
One day we may. Doesnt mean these things cannot or do not happen....you cannot extrapolate that.
BTW...I'm not a total thicko...I have an MSc...I'm not ignorant of the basics of research and evidence.

I shall just agree to disagree and leave it at that.


----------



## YorksG (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			All I'm saying is......again....we do not have the wherewithall to prove any of these claims RIGHT NOW.
One day we may. Doesnt mean these things cannot or do not happen....you cannot extrapolate that.
BTW...I'm not a total thicko...I have an MSc...I'm not ignorant of the basics of research and evidence.

I shall just agree to disagree and leave it at that.
		
Click to expand...

I'm with you Hippona
No I will not post the e-mail, as there are other things in it which I do not wish to share on a public forum, also if you don't believe what I've typed, why would you believe that I haven't 'created' the e-mails just for you?


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			All I'm saying is......again....we do not have the wherewithall to prove any of these claims RIGHT NOW.
One day we may. Doesnt mean these things cannot or do not happen....you cannot extrapolate that.
BTW...I'm not a total thicko...I have an MSc...I'm not ignorant of the basics of research and evidence.

I shall just agree to disagree and leave it at that.
		
Click to expand...

1. You have not addressed any of my points above which I took great pains to write in response to your argument that science gets it wrong.

2. If your position is that just because something has no proof now it doesn't mean that it won't have proof in the future, where do you draw the line? We have absolutely no proof now that telekinesis, predicting the future, swaping bodies and unicorns exist but who knows about the future? Does that mean you believe in all these things now?

3. Absence of direct evidence that something is the case is not always problematic, e.g. we have no direct proof that black holes exist but there are still good reasons to suppose that they do because of everything else we know about the universe. Psychic abilities clash with everything else we know about how the natural world works, they are not just unproven, they are contrary to everything we have proven.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			I'm with you Hippona
No I will not post the e-mail, as there are other things in it which I do not wish to share on a public forum, also if you don't believe what I've typed, why would you believe that I haven't 'created' the e-mails just for you?
		
Click to expand...

No one has called you a liar. People have suggested though that in this instance you were gullible in a way very typical of all human beings. 

Surely a public forum is the best place for this amazing evidence of psychic ability. One look at this e-mail and you believed this person was genuine, imagine sharing all this with the hundreds if not thousands of people who read the forum.


----------



## Serephin (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			2. If your position is that just because something has no proof now it doesn't mean that it won't have proof in the future, where do you draw the line? We have absolutely no proof now that telekinesis, predicting the future, swaping bodies and unicorns exist but who knows about the future? Does that mean you believe in all these things now?
		
Click to expand...

Didn't they just prove that Telepathy existed recently?  I think it was with rats.

I think people can believe in whatever they want, whether you consider them a raging imbecile for not requiring scientific proof is entirely irrelevant.  

The day an animal communicator holds you down and demands money with menaces for a reading with your dog, then maybe you have an argument to be so opposed.  Otherwise, I really do not know what the big deal is.  I like the FACT that there is mystery in life, makes it far more interesting.


----------



## Hippona (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			1. You have not addressed any of my points above which I took great pains to write in response to your argument that science gets it wrong.

2. If your position is that just because something has no proof now it doesn't mean that it won't have proof in the future, where do you draw the line? We have absolutely no proof now that telekinesis, predicting the future, swaping bodies and unicorns exist but who knows about the future? Does that mean you believe in all these things now?

.
		
Click to expand...

1. Where did I say that science gets it wrong

2. Yes....if it annoys you. Because I can.


----------



## Serephin (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			2. Yes....if it annoys you. Because I can.

Click to expand...

Tee hee!  Don't poke the disbelievers!


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

Serephin said:



			Didn't they just prove that Telepathy existed recently?  I think it was with rats.
		
Click to expand...

Someone proved psychic communication with rats? Where exactly did that take place?


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			2. Yes....if it annoys you. Because I can.

Click to expand...

It doesn't annoy me at all. Why would your irrational beliefs annoy me? That's a surprising amount of importance you accord to your beliefs.

Don't confuse what you can do with what you should do. Of course you can hold silly beliefs, of course you can post them online and refuse to engage with people who disagree with you...whether you should be doing any of these things is another matter.


----------



## Serephin (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Someone proved psychic communication with rats? Where exactly did that take place?
		
Click to expand...

Oh, my mistake, they implanted something into their brains so that they could communicate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ing-implant-gives-rats-telepathic-powers.html

was excited for a moment there


----------



## Gloi (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Someone proved psychic communication with rats? Where exactly did that take place?
		
Click to expand...

No, that was just another case of taking half a story and twisting it. Here's the full story. No magic was involved.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ding-implant-gives-rats-telepathic-power.html


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

Serephin said:



			Oh, my mistake, they implanted something into their brains so that they could communicate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ing-implant-gives-rats-telepathic-powers.html

was excited for a moment there 

Click to expand...

You should be excited! That is brilliant, cutting-edge neuroscience! There is so much in the actual brain that is incredible there is no need to invent magical powers.

(DM article is as always utter dross, but thanks for the other link Gloi, incredibly interesting)


----------



## lazybee (8 March 2013)

I don't know how anyone can doubt animal communication??

Has no one seen Dr Doolittle, Skippy, Lassie or Flipper? there you go, concrete proof


----------



## Beausmate (8 March 2013)

I wonder how many people who think the whole ac/psychic stuff is bunkum believe in god.


----------



## Gloi (8 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			I wonder how many people who think the whole ac/psychic stuff is bunkum believe in god.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not into this 'believing' lark. I like solid peer reviewed proof.


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Beausmate I do not believe in God either despite being brought up in a fairly devote catholic family. I think there was a very powerful, charismatic preacher in history called Jesus though & his teachings & a whole lot of Chinese whispers became the bible.
I shunned religion at a fairly young age as I was seeing too much bigotry thinly veiled as faith.
I also don't believe in faith healing, homeopathy, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, tarot cards, palm reading, that the MMR vaccine causes autism, fairies,angels or unicorns.

I do think that hypnotherapy is a powerful tool, that there is some evidence that acupuncture helps certain conditions & some herbal remedies are powerful medicines


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Oh & the things that I say I believe in are all things I've read researched evidence for. Although there was some debate on the acupuncture & placebo effect.


----------



## Ellemoo (8 March 2013)

This thread has fascinated me, ive always been one of the 'not sure which side i sit on' types with this sort of thing. And fairly recently i had a reading with a medium/clairvoyant- partly out of curiosity and the fact ive lost a lot of family members etc and maybe wanted some comfort? I was blown away by my experience personally, and had thought there was no way this lady could have done any prior 'digging' about me etc, i with held my number when i called to make a booking and i only gave my first name etc.
Ive have now googled 'cold reading' and read with interest! But i have to say that i honestly dont see how this was dobe to me?? The accuracy of the things this lady came out with was crazy- and it wasnt like she kept pausing and waiting for clues from my body language- she litterally just blurt out a name and several facts about that person :S 
If someone can tell me more in depth how this lady could possibly have got this information from my body language, i would be genuinely very open to listen to them!!


----------



## Toast (8 March 2013)

I was once working at a yard where one of the liveries had a Reiki lady to her horse. This woman blatantly didn't know what she was doing. She walked past one of the other staffs horses and declared that she had Cystitis in her bowel, and she knew because the horse had told her.....righto.
Funny kind of Reiki too, the poor client hadn't got a clue that Reiki isn't anything to do with communication!


----------



## lt0510 (8 March 2013)

I have had my horses 'spoken' too and I truely believe that there is something in it.  Just because they don't speak the same language doesn't mean that they can't communicate.  I think people have to be open minded about things.  My chaps said things that the person could not have known.  One of my horses was owned from weaning and bred by a friend so I knew the complete history.  :0)


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Ellemoo this video is great place to start http://youtu.be/idVxRE8uM-A

In terms of the firing out facts it's called 'fishing' & I would bet (oh Crikey should I use that phrase again!)  the lady fired out a large amount of facts but your memory has only highlighted the ones that were relevant. I've said it before & I'll say it again falling for psychology techniques which recreate psychic ability is not any sort of reflection on you. 
I'm wondering when you had your reading did the lady honestly say
'I'm getting the name John, he was your grandfather, he died when he was 97, he used to drive a blue car with the registration number w123 sdp. He lived at 74 blossom road. He died from pancreatic cancer' 
Or was is more like 
'I'm getting the name John' - you possibly admit it was your grandfather. Now the telling thing is you would probably say he 'was' your grandfather so reader knows he is dead 
He was old when he passed wasn't he?
I'm seeing the colour blue related to him & something to do with a garden or possibly flowers. I'm sensing he passed with some problem relating to his chest or his abdomen.


----------



## Hippona (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			It doesn't annoy me at all. Why would your irrational beliefs annoy me? That's a surprising amount of importance you accord to your beliefs.

Don't confuse what you can do with what you should do. Of course you can hold silly beliefs, of course you can post them online and refuse to engage with people who disagree with you...whether you should be doing any of these things is another matter.
		
Click to expand...

Hmmm....so its only your beliefs that are important then? And mine are silly. Nice. 

How am I not engaging with you? By simply not allowing you to brow-beat me into submission?

I've had certain experiences. I'm not alone in that.
I'm not going into details on here so you can attempt to belittle me further. 

Can I explain them? No...there was no scientific explanation. 
Can I prove them....Not at all.
Did they happen...yes, they did. Most certainly. 

No...I don't believe in god as an entity. I believe there is more in this world than can be _currently_ proved by science. 

My occupation practices evidence based research....I'm not a loony running around talking to trees....

Its no wonder that people tend not to speak up when they have an inexplicable experience......

I will not be commenting on this thread again.


----------



## Ellemoo (8 March 2013)

Glamourpuss- sorry i cant quote as im on my phone. Ill give an example of one of the things she said: "theres a lovely lady with a short bob hair cut, she says her name is *name here*, she died from cancer, she wants you all to know shes ok, and she enjoys spending time with you when your with the horses"  
What about my body language could have been saying that to her?? 
Just going to look at the link you posted now


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Just another thought, over time there have been many things that have not been provable by 'science', but people had sufficiently open minds to explore the possibility that they may still be true.
		
Click to expand...

There's a flaw in this logic.  The flaw being that we have the means to test psychic ability - by getting psychics in and testing their ability to read objects, photos, people etc and seeing how often they get it right.  In every attempt to show psychic ability of this nature under controlled conditions, there has been no psychic ability demonstrated.  i.e. we can test it, and every test thus far has shown that it doesn't exist.  Completely different to not being able to demonstrate microbiotic life forms, because you don't have sufficiently magnifying microscopes.

Science can't explain psychics, just as science has struggled to explain physical, chemical and biological phenomena in the past (and will continue to).  The difference is, when we test for these phenomena, we can show that they must happen (think of Pasteur's experiments proving the presence of micro organisms, long before we could see them under a microscope).  Yet every attempt to show psychic ability has yielded zilch.  That's the difference.



Flame_ said:



			Doesn't everybody watch the mentalist?
		
Click to expand...

I prefer Psych 



Hippona said:



			Sorry....i was cooking when I typed that. Meant to say......people believed the world to be FLAT.....and that you dropped off the edge. One day it was proved otherwise.....
		
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware, that is an extremely common urban myth.  The ancient Greeks wrote about the Earth being spherical, as did the Romans.


----------



## YorksG (8 March 2013)

Do the 'scientists' on this thread believe there is diagnosable illness of schizophrenia?


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

JFTD the testing thing is the big thing. Derren Brown responded to claims that there may be some frauds but there are also those with a gift. He said in that case just as we need to protect ourselves from dodgy plumbers people should be able to protect themselves from the fraud psychics. He wanted to create a testing procedure & then a register of psychics. He even said he would promote the ones on the register. Now given how big his TV show is that would be an amazing opportunity for anyone.

As yet not a single psychic has put themselves forward to the register. 

One of the biggest psychics in the country Sally Morgan has been invited to kick start the scheme. This is a woman who has sell out shows & has written books on the subject. Surely she MUST be one of the real psychics, no?
To this day she still hasn't presented herself for testing even though she has been told she can change the test to however she prefers her 'gift' to work.
Very telling.

Ellemoo if that is exactly how she said it then I would suspect 'hot reading' this is when someone has direct information in you. The Internet, google, Facebook, Twitter & Forums make this job *much* easier now a days


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Do the 'scientists' on this thread believe there is diagnosable illness of schizophrenia?
		
Click to expand...

I believe there have been diagnoses of schizophrenia.  

There is a difference, though, between specific scientific issues, and broad principles of science.  It's the theory of science which posters on this thread have been trying to explain in the context of a broad question (do ACs have psychic power).

I don't really see how the issues with diagnosis of complex neurological disorders such as schizophrenia have to do with it.  Yes, scientific opinion regarding mental illness has changed, however there is a difference between a phenomenon which was observed and the causation misattributed, and a phenomenon which cannot be reliably observed under controlled conditions.


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

[adds JFTD to my list of people I actually love]


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			[adds JFTD to my list of people I actually love]
		
Click to expand...

*fist bump (cos us scientists can be cool too)*


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			I'm not into this 'believing' lark. I like solid peer reviewed proof.
		
Click to expand...

Nice post.  Direct and straight to the point, and I agree with it.

It doesn't mean I don't have a mind which isn't open to possibilities. But someone elses' story of "a weird thing which happened to me" doesn't stack up as evidence, sorry.  I would need much, much more solid evidence under controlled conditions to take it seriously.

For this reason I don't believe in God, or anything else I can't see any evidence of.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (8 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			I wonder how many people who think the whole ac/psychic stuff is bunkum believe in god.
		
Click to expand...

nope, atheist


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Beausmate I do not believe in God either despite being brought up in a fairly devote catholic family. I think there was a very powerful, charismatic preacher in history called Jesus though & his teachings & a whole lot of Chinese whispers became the bible.
I shunned religion at a fairly young age as I was seeing too much bigotry thinly veiled as faith.
I also don't believe in faith healing, homeopathy, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, tarot cards, palm reading, that the MMR vaccine causes autism, fairies,angels or unicorns.

I do think that hypnotherapy is a powerful tool, that there is some evidence that acupuncture helps certain conditions & some herbal remedies are powerful medicines
		
Click to expand...

This but change "catholic" for "greek orthodox".


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

Serephin said:



			Oh, my mistake, they implanted something into their brains so that they could communicate. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ing-implant-gives-rats-telepathic-powers.html

was excited for a moment there 

Click to expand...

*raises eyes at the offering of the DM as a source of information.*


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			I wonder how many people who think the whole ac/psychic stuff is bunkum believe in god.
		
Click to expand...

Very few, if any, I should think.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

I used to be an atheist, but now am an agnostic as I see the concept of a God as an innately unscientific question (we can't test whether there is a God, as we can't exclude the possibility of different planes of existence so we can't ever answer that question).  So, whilst I see no evidence for a God, and choose not to believe in one, I accept that I cannot prove or "know" there is no such thing, thus I am an atheistic agnostic.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (8 March 2013)

Science cannot explain how the bodies of some Catholic saints remain incorrupt after death. Some saints, even hundreds of years later look as though they are asleep and smell of a sweet odour.

Does this mean that unless logic and reason can explain it, it does not exist ?


----------



## Serephin (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			*raises eyes at the offering of the DM as a source of information.* 

Click to expand...


I was going to put a link to the Telegraph article, but it was easier at the time to just link to the Daily Mail instead.

But obviously I am just a thicko tabloid reader who will believe anything.

There are some sanctimonious b*tches on this thread.  Glad I do not have to endure you in RL.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Science cannot explain how the bodies of some Catholic saints remain incorrupt after death. Some saints, even hundreds of years later look as though they are asleep and smell of a sweet odour.

Does this mean that unless logic and reason can explain it, it does not exist ?
		
Click to expand...

no, if they exist and they are in such a state, they can be observed - and observation is the first pillar of science.  If science can't explain how they're in that condition, there is no reason to dispute the observation - science will just say we don't have a good explanation yet, religion will attribute a relgious explanation.  If science can't come up with a corporeal explanation, then people have the option of believing there's a scientific reason we don't know yet, or that the religious explanation is true.

I don't know anything about the specifics of incorrupt saints though - never looked at any of the evidence - scientific or otherwise.  However, the point is that science has repeatedly tried and failed to observe psychics actually performing psychic activity, rather than that we can't explain how it happens.  That said, a new study could start tomorrow and change that - as is always the way with science - and actually demonstrate psychic activity.  Then we'd have to start looking for an explanation!  It seems unlikely though when the most succesful of those who call themselves psychic are so reluctant to prove their own skills.



btw, telegraph's not much better than the mail in science circles.  Peer reviewed journals are where it's at


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

Serephin said:



			I was going to put a link to the Telegraph article, but it was easier at the time to just link to the Daily Mail instead.

But obviously I am just a thicko tabloid reader who will believe anything.

There are some sanctimonious b*tches on this thread.  Glad I do not have to endure you in RL.
		
Click to expand...

You are quite entitled to your opinion of me, Serephin. Even though you don't know me. 

You are even more entitled to your stated opinion of yourself, who you of course know much better.


----------



## Serephin (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			You are quite entitled to your opinion of me, Serephin. Even though you don't know me. 

You are even more entitled to your stated opinion of yourself, who you of course know much better. 

Click to expand...

indeed.

*leaves thread to converse with the fairies*


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			There is some really interesting research on how the proliferation of ideas via the internet has actually resulted in people who will believe anything as they lack the skills (and will?) to critically assess the source of the information. Have you come across the tree-octopus study?
		
Click to expand...

No - I'd missed that one but thanks for the steer, have now genned up on Google - quite funny. These hoaxes were reserved for April Fools at one time like the BBC's spagetti trees and the flooding caused by a crash involving a lorry loaded with dehydreated water tablets!!!

My own lads watch a programme with Prof Stephen Hawkin recently - said they sort of understood Black Holes - then proceeded to ask me about equal and opposite White Holes - where would you start???

I've just met a prospective client who doesn't "believe" in the Moon landings!!!


----------



## YorksG (8 March 2013)

Is schizophrenia a complex neurological disorder? Not as far as I am aware. There is an observed cluster of symptoms, which may or may not be neurological in origin (we do not know, as we do not have the ability to test for this). Not all people with the diagnosis of schizophrenia will display the same symptoms and there is emerging evidence that the diagnosis is in fact over used and that some of the symptoms in the cluster could  be as a result of other disease. There was a time though when people in the scientific community  had 'proved' the existance of 'schizophrenia', knew its location in the brain and surgically 'removed' the schizophrenia (leucotomy, performed in UK into the 1980's). That peer reviewed proof has since been disproved, to accept only that which has current scientific 'proof', shows a degree of concrete thinking, which indicates a very closed mind.


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			No - I'd missed that one but thanks for the steer, have now genned up on Google - quite funny. These hoaxes were reserved for April Fools at one time like the BBC's spagetti trees and the flooding caused by a crash involving a lorry loaded with dehydreated water tablets!!!

My own lads watch a programme with Prof Stephen Hawkin recently - said they sort of understood Black Holes - then proceeded to ask me about equal and opposite White Holes - where would you start???

I've just met a prospective client who doesn't "believe" in the Moon landings!!!
		
Click to expand...

Sadly, my ex-husband is a bit of a victim of all the internet conspiracy theories etc.  He has mental health issues and lives on the edge of reality at the best of times. Now he believes there are seven species of aliens (very precise, yes, seven) living among us and is obsessed with this "fact" and many others freely available on the internet.

I also knew someone who became convinced the American space program was all a hoax, moon landings included. He had a stack of "evidence" from the internet.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			We may have thought the earth was flat and then round and then eliptical but each time there was good reason for thinking this (e.g. flat: look we are not falling off the earth, round: look there is a solar system that accounts for gravity so we don't fall off a ball, etc.)).
		
Click to expand...

This business of ancient folk thinking the world was flat is totally bigged up out of all proportion - mainly based on the outpourings of that religious nutcase Bishop Usher who worked out from Biblical texts ( so he said ) that the Earth was created on the so&so of October 6006 years before.

In fact nothing could be further from the truth - certainly by Christopher Columbus's time - all sailors were CONVINCED it was a globe - but with no America in the way - which meant they would be sailing three quarters of the way around it before reaching the East Indies and FRESH WATER - not a pleasant prospect when beating against the prevailing Westerly wind and only having about 60 days rations on the biggest ships - drink you own urine anyone?


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			Is schizophrenia a complex neurological disorder? Not as far as I am aware. There is an observed cluster of symptoms, which may or may not be neurological in origin (we do not know, as we do not have the ability to test for this). Not all people with the diagnosis of schizophrenia will display the same symptoms and there is emerging evidence that the diagnosis is in fact over used and that some of the symptoms in the cluster could  be as a result of other disease. 

*Sounds like a complex disorder which has a neurological component to me.  Just because it's not simple or there are misdiagnoses or a multiplicity of presentations doesn't mean that the background science is useless.  That's true for loads of conditions - R. equi infection used to be misdiagnoses as TB, both of which can present as pulmanory or miliary infections.  Science now knows better and can distinguish different infections, different aetologies, different presentations.  That doesn't mean the previous work was wrong, it just wasn't the whole picture.*

There was a time though when people in the scientific community  had 'proved' the existance of 'schizophrenia', knew its location in the brain and surgically 'removed' the schizophrenia (leucotomy, performed in UK into the 1980's). That peer reviewed proof has since been disproved, to accept only that which has current scientific 'proof', shows a degree of concrete thinking, which indicates a very closed mind.
		
Click to expand...

No, you've introduced the idea of "proof".  I never mentioned proof.  I talked about a lack of evidence, despite repeated efforts to show an effect.  Scientists don't "prove" anything and they don't seek to.  Just because some scientists presented a solution which appeared promising (but was actually useless) doesn't mean that science is worthless - it means that science is constantly developing and questioning itself.  This is why repeated studies have been performed to attempt to show psychic ability - science didn't accept the first trial, it kept going - and people are still trying to prove it.  The fact that they haven't says a lot more than the occasional misdirection in published literature.  

One study isn't proof, two thousand studies aren't proof, but they are evidence, which can be taken as a plausible understanding of the world as we see it.

The trouble with an open mind is that anyone can walk right in and set up shop.  I personally try to keep a few locks on the door to keep the riff raff out   I'm always open to well constructed arguments and new evidence though.


----------



## YorksG (8 March 2013)

There is no evidence that schizophrenia has any neurological component, however in the past scientists have believed that the evidence has proved that they could 'find' the site of the illness. My point is that unless the evidence is observed correctly and with an open mind, then it is as worthless as belief, which is what it becomes in those instances. 
Some of the comments in this thread have become so rude and personal, nothing to do with evidence etc. that I shall refrain from continuing the debate. I will only debate with those who show a modicome of courtesy to others.


----------



## Ellemoo (8 March 2013)

So i phoned this lady with my number withheld and the only thing she knew about me was my name 'Elle' and that is actually short for Michelle which she wasnt told.. if she still somehow managed to research all of the things about my past, even things ive never told anyone, then fair play she earned that £30!


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			Sadly, my ex-husband is a bit of a victim of all the internet conspiracy theories etc.  He has mental health issues and lives on the edge of reality at the best of times. Now he believes there are seven species of aliens (very precise, yes, seven) living among us and is obsessed with this "fact" and many others freely available on the internet.

I also knew someone who became convinced the American space program was all a hoax, moon landings included. He had a stack of "evidence" from the internet.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear of OH's problems, as you might know Mrs FirstClass has had her moments but her's revolve around total disengagement rather than Conspiracy! 

This seven species of Aliens is interesting - one of my young helper's friends - prompted by his father - is of the same mind - does yours also think the Queen is a lizard? 

On the face of it - all Conspiracy has some merit - we all like the think bad of those in authority but if you begin to delve it usually ends there. The main problem for anti-Moonwalkers is the fact that while it was fully possible to send guys to the Moon in 1969 - it was NOT possible to fake it - to wit, I ask, just how convincing do you find modern CGI? It is entertaining - but does it look - real? 

Furthermore, C.T's ( Conspiracy Theorists) rely on everything being controlled by the Government - better still if they pronouce it Guvn'mint! But it isn't - it never can be because the Moon programme involved 250,000 people, most of whom had 2.4 kiddiwinks, a lovely wife called Kitty and a mortgage - some weren't even Yanks!! Shock horror! 

When the 47 minutes of live footage went out live - the important "one small step for man" bits - the Earth was turned in the wrong direction for direct transmission to America so the signals were sent by radio digital link to a British base in Australia then sent by telephone cable to the U.S. As our guys had to focus their big antenae on the stop where the signals originated - there is NO DOUBT that they were DEFINATELY coming from the MOON live - or else you have to explain why 400 British people suddenly want to lie for the Yanks!!!

I could go on.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			There is no evidence that schizophrenia has any neurological component, however in the past scientists have believed that the evidence has proved that they could 'find' the site of the illness.
		
Click to expand...

I beg to disagree - schizophrenic diagnoses are associated with high levels of dopamine in various parts of the brain, and schizoid behaviours can be induced (in disease models) by giving L-dopa (also reported in some cases of PD treated with L-dopa).  fMRI scans highlight differences in patients with schizophrenic diagnoses.  This is all evidence that was kicking about 5-10 years ago when I worked on it.  The understanding of pathology will certainly have evolved, but these factors have not, as far as I'm aware (and I'll admit, I haven't worked on neurobiology in years) been refuted.  That is a neuro component.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

Ellemoo said:



			So i phoned this lady with my number withheld and the only thing she knew about me was my name 'Elle' and that is actually short for Michelle which she wasnt told.. if she still somehow managed to research all of the things about my past, even things ive never told anyone, then fair play she earned that £30! 

Click to expand...

Once upon a time a big boat sank after hitting an iceberg on it's maiden voyage and drowned a lot of rich & strangely poor people with not many in betweeners - what boats there were around seemed to let it sink. How could this happen? Everyone asked - but then someone said - I wrote a book about it years ago - and look I put all of that in it!!!

The author knew that there was mileage in a disaster story so he went looking for one - hmmm... it needs to be a big thing ( the more fictional deaths I create, the better!) a train - no, not big enough and it's too easy to rescue everyone, an airship - only just invented so too futuristic ( no aeroplanes either) so it automatically became a ship..... a BIG ship... how about the BIGGEST ship ever built ..... and on it's maiden voyage eh? Great! Now, what am I to call this great big ship - SS Enormous? Nah... SS Gigantic.... hmm better... SS Ti.... yes. yes.... SS Titan - oh, great I like it (he never got it spot on) but he did predict the SS Titan hitting an iceberg - but what the hell else could it hit and sink in the flippin' Altantic ??? As for the passengers - he did some research and found that while the super rich loved to sail in style there were thousands of cheap steerage tickets sold for every liner. Bingo - but is NOT clairvoyance.


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			Sorry to hear of OH's problems, as you might know Mrs FirstClass has had her moments but her's revolve around total disengagement rather than Conspiracy!
		
Click to expand...

Sadly, our marriage did not survive his issues, and neither did his next marriage. 

I have seen mention of Mrs 1stClass's problems, and you both have my sympathy. Mental health issues, in all their forms, make life hard for the sufferer and their families.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			I beg to disagree - schizophrenic diagnoses are associated with high levels of dopamine in various parts of the brain, and schizoid behaviours can be induced (in disease models) by giving L-dopa (also reported in some cases of PD treated with L-dopa).  fMRI scans highlight differences in patients with schizophrenic diagnoses.  This is all evidence that was kicking about 5-10 years ago when I worked on it.  The understanding of pathology will certainly have evolved, but these factors have not, as far as I'm aware (and I'll admit, I haven't worked on neurobiology in years) been refuted.  That is a neuro component.
		
Click to expand...

Very interesting - am I correct in thinking that this had to do with the sythasizing of dopamines for use in treatment of Parkinson's Disease etc.,?

I am all for the mental disorders being caused by something demonstrably deviant from the "norm" but cannot get my head round two actual people living inside the same flippin' head!!!
Mrs FirstClass was daft enough to allow herself to be diagnosed in need of "psyching" and will now defend it all like a woman possessed so I try to leave well alone; however; I find most psychology very difficult to accept.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			Very interesting - am I correct in thinking that this had to do with the sythasizing of dopamines for use in treatment of Parkinson's Disease etc.,?

*L- dopa is a molecule which is made into dopamine within certain neurones of the brain and it is (certainly was) used as a treatment for Parkinson's.
*
I am all for the mental disorders being caused by something demonstrably deviant from the "norm" but cannot get my head round two actual people living inside the same flippin' head!!!
Mrs FirstClass was daft enough to allow herself to be diagnosed in need of "psyching" and will now defend it all like a woman possessed so I try to leave well alone; however; I find most psychology very difficult to accept.
		
Click to expand...

Ah, I think you're thinking of Dissociative Identity Disorder (or whatever it's been rebranded as now), which is often confused with schizophrenia.  Schizophrenia is characterised by extreme paranoia, hallucinations, hearing voices, that sort of thing.  DID is hard to get your head round I agree.

As I say though, this isn't really my field 

eta - the lines between neurology and psychology are fascinating and (as far as I can tell) blurred.  Interesting world in there.


----------



## Kat (8 March 2013)

Fascinating thread. I've enjoyed following it, but don't think that I can contribute much. 

There are undoubtably things which are difficult to explain, and it would be really interesting if some psychics did submit to scientific tests. 

I enjoyed the discussions about evidence versus proof too.


----------



## Ellemoo (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan- thats confused me that has! Isnt the story of Titanic a true story, backed up by accounts and records of who was on board?? Or am i more stupid than i already assumed and your point has sailed straight over my head!


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			Ah, I think you're thinking of Dissociative Identity Disorder (or whatever it's been rebranded as now), which is often confused with schizophrenia.  Schizophrenia is characterised by extreme paranoia, hallucinations, hearing voices, that sort of thing.  DID is hard to get your head round I agree.
		
Click to expand...

The two are so often confused that I regularly hear people using the word "schizophrenic" to describe a sudden contradictory change of situation or person. For some reason people think schizophrenia means "split personality". I don't know how this misunderstanding came about.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			The two are so often confused that I regularly hear people using the word "schizophrenic" to describe a sudden contradictory change of situation or person. For some reason people think schizophrenia means "split personality". I don't know how this misunderstanding came about. 

Click to expand...

I don't know, it's odd isn't it.

It's like this "everyone believed the world was flat till they sailed round it" business.  Complete nonsense - the ancient Greeks did loads of maths / astronomy which demonstrated that the world is not flat but spheroid - just like the other celestial bodies they observed.  It's fascinating how these misconceptions arise.

I guess it's because it literally means split mind - so the leap to split personality is intuitive

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=schizophrenia


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

Ellemoo said:



			1stclassalan- thats confused me that has! Isnt the story of Titanic a true story, backed up by accounts and records of who was on board?? Or am i more stupid than i already assumed and your point has sailed straight over my head! 

Click to expand...

 He's not saying the Titanic disaster wasn't real, he's explaining why a writer might have appeared to "predict" it many years before the real event.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Science cannot explain how the bodies of some Catholic saints remain incorrupt after death. Some saints, even hundreds of years later look as though they are asleep and smell of a sweet odour.

Does this mean that unless logic and reason can explain it, it does not exist ?
		
Click to expand...

I am an atheist but I cannot imagine a world in which a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient god gives us free will so that we have the freedom to chose and by doing so accepts the down-side, i.e. that he will not intervene while millions upon millions of people get tortured, die of hunger, get slaughtered and suffer because of the exercise of our choices...but then re-thinks the whole issue and intervenes just to keep a couple of bodies from rotting. Nothing else, no saving of innocent children, no healing of the sick, no helpign the deserving poor, no just preventing some bodies from rotting.


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

P.S. I have to point this out otherwise my Greek ancestors will be rolling over in their graves: I do know the Ancient Greeks were superb astronomers and knew the earth was round and did mention it later on in the thread. At the earlier post I was responding to Hippona's claims about scientific truth changing by, momentarily, accepting her hypothesis that scientific proofs change and still showing the underlying argument to be wrong.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



 He's not saying the Titanic disaster wasn't real, he's explaining why a writer might have appeared to "predict" it many years before the real event.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on! Or should that be ICEBERG DEAD AHEAD!!!!

Mind you, it's far better for a ship to hit an iceberg dead ahead ( that's if you can't be bothered looking out for one till it's too late!) As then it will only crush the bow and a few compartments and not sink - scrape along the entire side and you have a big sinky problem!

Also, the order of HARD ASTARBOARD - quickly followed by FULL ASTERN was ridiculous and indicative of a certain amount of panic on the bridge ( Capt was off duty asleep) turning right or left was fair enough but putting the engines in full reverse took all the leeway off the rudder so in effect the ship hardly turned at all. 

Funnily enough - one of our Trafalgar class nuclear subs ran aground on its maiden voyage a while ago through exactly the same control confusion - and did £50 million of damage to the radar absorbing hull material. Oops.. there's one officer on car park duty.


----------



## 1stclassalan (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			I am an atheist but I cannot imagine a world in which a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient god gives us free will so that we have the freedom to chose and by doing so accepts the down-side, i.e. that he will not intervene while millions upon millions of people get tortured, die of hunger, get slaughtered and suffer because of the exercise of our choices...but then re-thinks the whole issue and intervenes just to keep a couple of bodies from rotting. Nothing else, no saving of innocent children, no healing of the sick, no helpign the deserving poor, no just preventing some bodies from rotting.
		
Click to expand...

Behold!!! I am a jealous GOD and the sins of the father shall be the sins of the son..... Yea, even unto the SEVENTH generation. 

So by that token then ( on average ) all I have to do is worship an idol or take His name in vain, not kept the Sabbath holy etc., etc., and my future generations will have about 175 years of penitance to do. Hah!


----------



## glamourpuss (8 March 2013)

Ellemoo we give a lot of clues about ourselves without body language.
These readers can deduce a lot of things from our age group, how we dress etc.
Also I would be really interested in hearing a tape recording  of the reading. In this case your female friend called xxx who died of cancer was a hit. I would be interested in how you relay it here is EXACTLY how it was said. As I stated earlier there can be a lot of vague information which the human mind can grasp to fit information in our mind. Now an example of how this can work for your reading.
Reader : Who's xxx?
You : She was a friend of mine
Reader: yes, I'm seeing her here. She was a lovely lady. I'm sensing she passed from cancer (a pretty sensible guess lots of people die from cancer sadly & if you are reasonably young sadly if you've lost a friend they are most likely to have died from cancer or a traumatic car crash)
Reader : I'm seeing her with a bob hair cut (again not a bad guess a bob haircut is pretty common amongst women & the term 'Bob' can cover a multitude of styles) 
Reader : she says she is happy (they're never unhappy are they) she likes seeing you with the horses (is horse people tend to give a lot of non verbal clues about our hobby with the way we dress I.e the label joules & country boots even when we're no where near a horse.

Also I would like to have heard what other information was given about xxx. Information which, because it wasn't a 'hit' & didn't fit your memory of her your subconscious has filtered out as bein irrelevant. You probably weren't even aware of it happening!

Now PLEASE don't get offended at what I've said. If you are happy with the reading you had then it makes no odds to you what I say does it? You know I don't believe. 

Again if the woman that did your reading was really so accurate then urge her to make herself $1,000,000 instead of messing about with a paltry £30 here & there


----------



## Ellemoo (8 March 2013)

Glamourpuss- no offence taken at all dont worry! I find it totally fascinating to hear a differing view on the subject- and as much as my reading with this lady brought me a lot of comfort, strangely i still sit on the fence with believing it- as has been pointed out numerous times there is no proof to back psychic ability up  
The reading was 'exactly' as i relayed it here, there was no questioning to see my response, just her saying what she said! She also mentioned the year that the lady passed away and that her son was 15 at the time and had no chance to grieve. No other information was suggested and if she had had any more to say i couldnt have known if it was true or not, as the lady who passed away was my partners mother and she died 7 years before i met him


----------



## lazybee (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			I am an atheist but I cannot imagine a world in which a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient god gives us free will so that we have the freedom to chose and by doing so accepts the down-side, i.e. that he will not intervene while millions upon millions of people get tortured, die of hunger, get slaughtered and suffer because of the exercise of our choices...but then re-thinks the whole issue and intervenes just to keep a couple of bodies from rotting. Nothing else, no saving of innocent children, no healing of the sick, no helpign the deserving poor, no just preventing some bodies from rotting.
		
Click to expand...


Quite true,

Love him loathe him, part of a Ricky Gervais routine goes like this:

Where are my car keys?

Damn where are my car keys?

God where are my car keys?

Come on god if you're up there, just this once. Show me where my keys are.

Astonished, he gets answered.

I'm sorry Ricky I'm busy right now, giving African babies AIDS


----------



## MerrySherryRider (8 March 2013)

Boo Boos said:



			Not quite, there are plenty of documented records, verified by doctors, of unexplained healing for terminally ill people but if you are an atheist, miracles would have passed you by. 

BTW, Lazybee,  A prayer to St Jude, has always helped me find something I've lost, but its, ok, I'm happy for you put it down to coincidence.  For myself, I'd rather say thank you.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Booboos (8 March 2013)

horserider said:



			BTW, Lazybee,  A prayer to St Jude, has always helped me find something I've lost, but its, ok, I'm happy for you put it down to coincidence.  For myself, I'd rather say thank you.
		
Click to expand...

Wow god must really rate you to spend his time finding your lost items. Any chance you could ask for a cure for AIDS, or an end to world hunger, or peace on earth next time though?


----------



## Pippity (8 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			Spot on! Or should that be ICEBERG DEAD AHEAD!!!!

Mind you, it's far better for a ship to hit an iceberg dead ahead ( that's if you can't be bothered looking out for one till it's too late!) As then it will only crush the bow and a few compartments and not sink - scrape along the entire side and you have a big sinky problem!

Also, the order of HARD ASTARBOARD - quickly followed by FULL ASTERN was ridiculous and indicative of a certain amount of panic on the bridge ( Capt was off duty asleep) turning right or left was fair enough but putting the engines in full reverse took all the leeway off the rudder so in effect the ship hardly turned at all.
		
Click to expand...

I was a reporter on the local rag when _Titanic_ came out. A local family related to Murdoch (officer on watch at the time of the collision; gave the orders) contacted me to get me to run a story complaining about Murdoch's portrayal in the film. "He gave the order to turn the ship!" they said. "If he hadn't, the ship would have gone straight into the iceberg!"

They didn't believe me when I pointed out that going straight into the iceberg would have been the best thing to do in that situation...


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Wow god must really rate you to spend his time finding your lost items. Any chance you could ask for a cure for AIDS, or an end to world hunger, or peace on earth next time though?
		
Click to expand...

ach c'mon, is this really necessary?


----------



## Patterdale (8 March 2013)

JFTD - 'The trouble with an open mind is that anyone can walk right in and set up shop. I personally try to keep a few locks on the door to keep the riff raff out'

Best quote ever!


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

Patterdale said:



			JFTD - 'The trouble with an open mind is that anyone can walk right in and set up shop. I personally try to keep a few locks on the door to keep the riff raff out'

Best quote ever!
		
Click to expand...

*sniggers*


Full disclosure:  the first sentence is a Terry Pratchett quotation


----------



## Hippona (8 March 2013)

Hmm. According to Terry Pratchett the world is flat. Well..Discworld is at any rate.

No idea where that fits in.....

*leaves thread again to pour another glass of red*


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Hmm. According to Terry Pratchett the world is flat. Well..Discworld is at any rate.

No idea where that fits in.....

*leaves thread again to pour another glass of red*
		
Click to expand...

And floats through space on the backs of 4 elephants, astride a giant turtle 

And it has a circumfence 

*yes I am bumping this thread up for a bit of Terry Pratchett worship*


----------



## Littlelegs (8 March 2013)

I'm too thick for the terry pratchett jokes, I can't even count, one...two...many...


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

Littlelegs said:



			I'm too thick for the terry pratchett jokes, I can't even count, one...two...many...
		
Click to expand...

Stupid men are often capable of things the clever would not even contemplate 


*from this point onwards this evening I intend to communicate solely in Pratchett quotations*


----------



## FionaM12 (8 March 2013)

My daughter is a TP fan and I read a couple of his books because she insisted. 

To her disappointment, although I found them quite amusing I wasn't keen enough to want to read any more. Not really my cup of tea.


----------



## JFTDWS (8 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			My daughter is a TP fan and I read a couple of his books because she insisted. 

To her disappointment, although I found them quite amusing I wasn't keen enough to want to read any more. Not really my cup of tea.
		
Click to expand...

Stories of imagination tend to upset those without one 


(I don't really mean that but it seems the most appropriate quotation I can find  )


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Wow god must really rate you to spend his time finding your lost items. Any chance you could ask for a cure for AIDS, or an end to world hunger, or peace on earth next time though?
		
Click to expand...

Ive spent the last 5 minutes reading this thread and you must be the most intolerant, rude person on it.
You rubbish anyone whos beliefs are different to yours, belittle and berate them you like to base your beliefs on science, others are more spiritual, show a little respect to others


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			Ive spent the last 5 minutes reading this thread and you must be the most intolerant, rude person on it.
You rubbish anyone whos beliefs are different to yours, belittle and berate them you like to base your beliefs on science, others are more spiritual, show a little respect to others
		
Click to expand...

If you chose to join a tread that specifically challenges a set of beliefs why do you find it rude when these beliefs are challenged by reason? Instead of being shocked at my 'rudeness' why not provide counter arguments that would make me change my mind?

As for the religion comments:
1. I didn't bring up religion. One poster asked for people's beliefs in the hopes of showing an inconsistency - I, amongst others, was happy to answer instead of wailing about how upset I was at the question. Again another poster brought up the issue of miracles and the power of prayer, not me. If you think a topic is beyond the bounds of reasonable discussion you should not bring it up in such a discussion.

2. I stand by my comment to horserider that you quoted. In a world presided over by a benevolent, omnipotent god it is both extremely arrogant to think that this being responds to your pleas and extremely immoral to use this opportunity to ask for tiny personal favours.

3. I am not intolerant as I have no problem with others having, expressing and living their lives in accordance with their views. I am also not intolerant as I welcome the opportunity to discuss these views.

4. I fail to see what is disrespectful in taking the time to think through and articulate arguments in a discussion.


----------



## Gloi (9 March 2013)

My opinion is that we spend too much time trying to be accepting of opinions that really should be called out as baloney. 
If someone said 'I think horses should be fed on pies' it would be called out as rubbish so why should there be given leeway to something just because it is said to be 'spiritual'. Prove what you say and I'll accept it otherwise it's free to challenge.


----------



## spookypony (9 March 2013)

I don't quite know whether to laugh or cry, so I think I'll go check if there's any new episodes of _Mythbusters_ out instead.


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			My opinion is that we spend too much time trying to be accepting of opinions that really should be called out as baloney. 
If someone said 'I think horses should be fed on pies' it would be called out as rubbish so why should there be given leeway to something just because it is said to be 'spiritual'. Prove what you say and I'll accept it otherwise it's free to challenge.
		
Click to expand...

I have some sympathy with the idea that spiritual beliefs should in principle be accorded some importance qua spiritual beliefs because they usually capture a person's values, how they ought to live their lives, what kind of person they ought to be, etc. However, this is not a free pass; I don't think you can get away with anything you like as long as you call it your spiritual/religious belief, nor do I think that if you put up the belief for rational scrutiny you can then be offended when it fails.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			If you chose to join a tread that specifically challenges a set of beliefs why do you find it rude when these beliefs are challenged by reason? Instead of being shocked at my 'rudeness' why not provide counter arguments that would make me change my mind?

As for the religion comments:
1. I didn't bring up religion. One poster asked for people's beliefs in the hopes of showing an inconsistency - I, amongst others, was happy to answer instead of wailing about how upset I was at the question. Again another poster brought up the issue of miracles and the power of prayer, not me. If you think a topic is beyond the bounds of reasonable discussion you should not bring it up in such a discussion.

2. I stand by my comment to horserider that you quoted. In a world presided over by a benevolent, omnipotent god it is both extremely arrogant to think that this being responds to your pleas and extremely immoral to use this opportunity to ask for tiny personal favours.

3. I am not intolerant as I have no problem with others having, expressing and living their lives in accordance with their views. I am also not intolerant as I welcome the opportunity to discuss these views.

4. I fail to see what is disrespectful in taking the time to think through and articulate arguments in a discussion.
		
Click to expand...

in your second paragraph yet again you belittle someones beliefs, its not enough for you to say you dont believe ( for the record neither do I ) but i have more respect for others than to rubbish their beliefs.
Again, if someone has an opinion that differs from yours, whether they are capable of articulating it to your standards, doesnt make it any less valid.
You come accross as extremely arrogent, rude and intolerant of others beliefs if they differ from yours quoting science at every oppertunity, as you are entitled to, but please do so without rubbishing what others believe based in spiritual not scientific beliefs.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			My opinion is that we spend too much time trying to be accepting of opinions that really should be called out as baloney. 
If someone said 'I think horses should be fed on pies' it would be called out as rubbish so why should there be given leeway to something just because it is said to be 'spiritual'. Prove what you say and I'll accept it otherwise it's free to challenge.
		
Click to expand...

The sheer arrogence of this is astounding .....


----------



## Flame_ (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			in your second paragraph yet again you belittle someones beliefs, its not enough for you to say you dont believe ( for the record neither do I ) but i have more respect for others than to rubbish their beliefs.
		
Click to expand...

Why is religion the only the thing we're not allowed to take the piss out of when its the thing that makes the _least_ sense to any rational person? 

Booboos has been perfectly polite, you just don't like where she's coming from.


----------



## Littlelegs (9 March 2013)

100% with marydoll. Perhaps I'm just confident enough in my own decision to be an atheist that I don't need to re-affirm it by being rude about somebody else's choices.


----------



## Mr Nick (9 March 2013)

i dont think Booboos has been rude at all.  She is certainly forthright but you can't fault the logic.


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

I can, mr nick. Or at least one of the premises on which they're based. Technically horse rider said that she prays to the patron saint of lost things and he helps her find them - not god. Since a patron saint is unlikely (in ecclesiastical terms) to be responsible for other interventions, any success with finding things is not necessarily relevant to a god sitting back and allowing the innocent to die.


----------



## Mr Nick (9 March 2013)

mm but i would have thought - and i may well be wrong here - that patronly saint duties would be an add on, a sort of enhanced service to the general business of watching over and protecting and doing god's work?


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

Mr Nick said:



			mm but i would have thought - and i may well be wrong here - that patronly saint duties would be an add on, a sort of enhanced service to the general business of watching over and protecting and doing god's work?
		
Click to expand...

You might choose to assume that, but I'm sure horserider explains it differently.

Ultimately with religion, it's not a scientific debate because it's not something we can test or investigate empirically - it's just not of this world.  And you can aways explain vague signals in different ways and with different significance.  It's not like AC or other supernatural phenomena, which generally have some element which is testable in this world.  Religion would still exist and people still believe even if science explained every miracle on earth - because the belief in a creator, greater power, overseer is quite intuitive to explain why we're here.


----------



## glamourpuss (9 March 2013)

I have noticed one thing. If you don't believe in Spritualistic phenomenon & prefer scientific reasoning it would appear, according to this thread, that you are arrogant & rude. I've been called it twice & now Booboos. 

Can I say I have much respect for Ellemoo. She hasn't once got angry or insulted at any of my clumsy attempts to explain her experience. In fact not being accused of rudeness/arrogance/calling her a liar is quite refreshing. It is much easier to debate & respect someone's opinion when it isn't slung at you with insults


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			in your second paragraph yet again you belittle someones beliefs, its not enough for you to say you dont believe ( for the record neither do I ) but i have more respect for others than to rubbish their beliefs.
Again, if someone has an opinion that differs from yours, whether they are capable of articulating it to your standards, doesnt make it any less valid.
You come accross as extremely arrogent, rude and intolerant of others beliefs if they differ from yours quoting science at every oppertunity, as you are entitled to, but please do so without rubbishing what others believe based in spiritual not scientific beliefs.
		
Click to expand...

My second paragraph does not rubbish the religious belief, quite the contrary it assumes they are right. Assuming there is a benevolent, omniscient god who sits in judgement of our behaviour, asking him to intervene for petty, self-centred concerns is both arrogant and immoral. So by the religious person's own standards what they are doing is wrong.

The rest of it, honestly, I am having trouble responding to but here's my best try:

I have no problems with people whose opinions differ from mine, that is my profession, I love a good debate. However, the debate has to be good with some decent arguments on both sides and without anyone throwing their toys out of their pram because it looks like they may be wrong.

My objection is one of vacuity not articulation, i.e. there are no good arguments behind the beliefs, rather than there are good arguments that the believer cannot articulate adequately. The believer's argument is very clear "I had a personal exepience which was extremely convincing and I refuse to accept that I may have been tricked", it's just not a very convincing argument for others.

As above I dind't rubbish the spiritual basis of the belief, I called attention to the hypocricy of its internal inconsistency; by its own standards that is a pretty poor belief to have.


----------



## lazybee (9 March 2013)

Personally I don't see why a mere '_belief_' should be off limits? A difference of belief is not arrogance. Why can't someone make an opposing comment?

 If I said I '_believed_' Jeremy Clarkson is very witty and a snappy dresser(I don't BTW) and someone else said oh no! I '_believe_' he's a complete arse with infantile schoolboy humour and dresses like a 1970's geography teacher. 

If you tried to tell the basic Christian story to the four billion non-Christians, do you think they'd accept it without comment? You'd have an easier time convincing them of the existence of Father Christmas or elves. 
There's several thousand, likely more, who believe strapping yourself with explosives is a valid expression devoutness. Would anyone say it's arrogant to comment on these beliefs?

The same goes for so called Psychics, AC's, raiki practitioners, Homeopathy etc.

I agree with BooBoos 100% but she's a far better wordsmith than I am.


I do have fairies at the bottom of my garden as it happens............you don't agree??? How arrogant of you.


----------



## Superhot (9 March 2013)

I'm sitting here listening to the pouring rain, and catching up with this thread.  To be honest, the conclusion I'm coming to is that no wonder there are always wars going on in the world, when you would hope that like minded people could get on with each other, express opinions without getting nasty, but no, they can't, not even on this forum...


----------



## Ellemoo (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			I have noticed one thing. If you don't believe in Spritualistic phenomenon & prefer scientific reasoning it would appear, according to this thread, that you are arrogant & rude. I've been called it twice & now Booboos. 

Can I say I have much respect for Ellemoo. She hasn't once got angry or insulted at any of my clumsy attempts to explain her experience. In fact not being accused of rudeness/arrogance/calling her a liar is quite refreshing. It is much easier to debate & respect someone's opinion when it isn't slung at you with insults 

Click to expand...

Aww thanks  I have complete respect for others views on this. By the way, i watched the video you linked for me earlier in the thread- very interesting stuff! I can totally see how the ideas of cold/hot reading can be used to effect- but i can honestly say that im certain this wasnt the case with my reading. 
But as ive said, if that lady did somehow manage to do research on through use of internet etc me prior to seeing me and from only knowing an abbreviation of my first name- then i think she deserved that 30 quid 

Ive just remembered (i was that blown away by the following experience that i forgot it even happened haha) I had an AC out to see my mare once when she had totally gone off the rails  I cant remember this ladys name or anything unfortunately as it was so long ago, but i remember her saying "oooh im sensing a lot of tension, she doesnt like that trailer"  etc etc and then showing me some strange riding tecniques with imagining a gold string going from my heart to the horses heart  It actually had the desired effect, but i guess that was because i was so focused on the amazing gold string thing that i relaxed and forgot all the other usual things i was expecting the cow bag to do to me haha... ah well i was only 16 
She also reccomended me a fantastic feed programme to start her on, which ive seen the name pop up on here a few times recently actually, she was probably just a rep for the feed company and saw me coming


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			I have noticed one thing. If you don't believe in Spritualistic phenomenon & prefer scientific reasoning it would appear, according to this thread, that you are arrogant & rude. I've been called it twice & now Booboos. 

Can I say I have much respect for Ellemoo. She hasn't once got angry or insulted at any of my clumsy attempts to explain her experience. In fact not being accused of rudeness/arrogance/calling her a liar is quite refreshing. It is much easier to debate & respect someone's opinion when it isn't slung at you with insults 

Click to expand...

That is not what im saying,to you or the others who base your beliefs on science and its foundations. 
it is the intolerance of others beliefs that is arrogent and rude, you are entitled to your beliefs and can have them without belittling others, what they believe in is as valid as yours, and Booboos dressing up your intolerance with your " im having trouble responding attitude" let me try and explain it to the intelectually inferior " your superior attitude still doesnt make mine or their beliefs less valid than yours.


----------



## Gloi (9 March 2013)

Anything that has no rhyme or reason to it is automatically invalid.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			Anything that has no rhyme or reason to it is automatically invalid.
		
Click to expand...

In your opinion


----------



## Beausmate (9 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			Anything that has no rhyme or reason to it is automatically invalid.
		
Click to expand...

It's a good job scientists don't see things that way.


----------



## Gloi (9 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			It's a good job scientists don't see things that way.
		
Click to expand...

Example, please.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (9 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			Technically horse rider said that she prays to the patron saint of lost things and he helps her find them - not god. Since a patron saint is unlikely (in ecclesiastical terms) to be responsible for other interventions, any success with finding things is not necessarily relevant to a god sitting back and allowing the innocent to die.
		
Click to expand...

This is right. One of the traditions of the Catholic Church is that saints are patrons of different things, so a horse rider might petition St Anne for intercession in time of tragedy -or success.



Booboos said:



			My second paragraph does not rubbish the religious belief, quite the contrary it assumes they are right. Assuming there is a benevolent, omniscient god who sits in judgement of our behaviour, asking him to intervene for petty, self-centred concerns is both arrogant and immoral. So by the religious person's own standards what they are doing is wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, it would be if that was the only time prayer was offered.
However, as God is omnipotent, he can multi task and we are taught that he sees these small requests as a vital part of faith. Each person and the minutiae of every small life is important. 

I'm not offended by anyone's views, but thank you to those that posted about respect, it is appreciated.


----------



## Beausmate (9 March 2013)

Gloi said:



			Example, please.
		
Click to expand...

There are loads, but how about spontaneous human combustion?


----------



## Gloi (9 March 2013)

Beausmate said:



			There are loads, but how about spontaneous human combustion?
		
Click to expand...

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/not-so-spontaneous_human_combustion/


----------



## fburton (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			A nice summary of the literature:

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijz/2009/721798/

Click to expand...

Superb!


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			In your opinion 

Click to expand...

Denying logic is a bit like denying gravity...only worse.


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Denying logic is a bit like denying gravity...only worse.
		
Click to expand...

Gravity is a hard habit to shake off.



*back to Pratchett*


----------



## FionaM12 (9 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			*back to Pratchett*
		
Click to expand...

Must we?


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			Denying logic is a bit like denying gravity...only worse.
		
Click to expand...

Where have i denied logic  I just havent denied spiritual things .
Just because something cant be measured, pidgeon holed and peer reviewed, doesnt mean it has no value, how do we measure love ?
Im sure you must have someone you think loves you, how can you prove it ? 
Some things have to be accepted on faith alone to validate them


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			Gravity is a hard habit to shake off.



*back to Pratchett*
		
Click to expand...

Very witty


----------



## Littlelegs (9 March 2013)

I think there is a scientific & logical explanation for sixth sense/ psychic power. We just haven't discovered it yet. Just like stone age man wouldn't have been able to offer a scientific explanation of how sight or any other human sense or power works. I also think the human race is so dependent on language (whether spoken, braille, sign or pictures even) we could all just have stopped relying on another means of communication that is just as scientific & present as any other power a human has. Certainly, humans are pants at body language compared to other mammals, because we no longer rely on it. I see no reason why other basic human abilities can't have been lost along the way too. It's widely accepted that people who suddenly lose a sense often find another one heightens. And its accepted that the sense hasn't suddenly improved, it just wasn't being fully utilized previously as the person could manage without. So perhaps we just don't utilize a sense we all have, to the point we don't believe it exists. There's been millions of things that humans couldn't explain, which with the advances in science we can now give logical answers as to why & how they occur. I think being psychic is just one we haven't yet discovered the science for. And the brain is a complex organ we still know comparatively little about.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			I have noticed one thing. If you don't believe in Spritualistic phenomenon & prefer scientific reasoning it would appear, according to this thread, that you are arrogant & rude. I've been called it twice & now Booboos. 

Can I say I have much respect for Ellemoo. She hasn't once got angry or insulted at any of my clumsy attempts to explain her experience. In fact not being accused of rudeness/arrogance/calling her a liar is quite refreshing. It is much easier to debate & respect someone's opinion when it isn't slung at you with insults 

Click to expand...

It is not your beliefs, which you are quite entitled to hold, which have earned you the epithet 'arrogant' but rather your manner of belittling others' beliefs and experiences.  You have twice posted your version of conversations (which never happened) in response to posters experiences in direct contradiction of what the posters had just said.  That can only be called arrogant.
It is quite understandable that having been taken in by a charlatan yourself, you have become somewhat evangelical on the subject.  However some of us had a wide knowledge, including professional qualifications, and experience of psychology before any involvement whatsoever with a 'communicator' and are considerably less gullible than you admit to being, so you really don't need to worry about us.

Whilst we are quoting from fantastical literature, I recommend that you try to 'believe 6 impossible things before breakfast' (Lewis Carroll), you will find that it enriches your life experience.

The psychologist in me always finds it amusing that one poster in particular likes to divert a thread when she is losing an argument.


----------



## YorksG (9 March 2013)

Hate to return to the subject of schizophrenia, but cannot allow the comments earlier to remain unchallenged. There is no physical test which confirms or denies the existance of this disease. There is no form of diagnosis, other than self reported, or third party observation of psychotic symptoms. If these are present, along side other, often described as negative symptoms, a diagnosis may be made. It is possible to induce psychosis with a range of chemicals, these will not induce schizophrenia, which is an illness which requires a diagnosis over time and more than one psychotic episode. I have had extensive converstions and been provided with large amounts of literature from the the drug companies who make the third generation anti-psychotics and they admit that they do not 'know' how they work. They make surmises and believe that they have proven their efficacy, but this has been the case with the first and the second generation anti-psychotics, which were in fact mainly sedating, thus not reducing the symptoms, merely making the patient less of a nuisance.
JFTD, I was under the impression that you were about 26 years old, did you really under take such serious work at 16?


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

I was 17 and I was working on projects  at a major pharmaceutical company. The thing is that with any neurological (or psychological unless you dispute that the brain is the seat of consciousness) condition is complicated and where neuro-psych issues cross, the complexity is manifested is difficult diagnoses and disease characterisation. That doesn't mean that the issue doesn't exist corporeally, or isn't influenced by pharmacology. I thing that your argument is flawed and illogical. Clearly you disagree. I don't think that schizophrenia is especially relevant (or that either of our views on its causation further any debate).


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

Ok that is grammatically horrible - my phone changes words randomly / I am useless with typing on it and I can't edit. You get the gist.


Btw if the 'poster changing the subject' is aimed at me, I'm just trying to negate some of the more unpleasant undertones of the thread with some levity. I can't see that any arguments against psychic capabilities or ACs have been lost here! You must be reading a different thread from me


----------



## FionaM12 (9 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			JFTD, I was under the impression that you were about 26 years old, did you really under take such serious work at 16?
		
Click to expand...

That seems a bit barbed and rude tbh YorksG. I don't think any of us need to produce our birth certificates or cv to be believed!


----------



## YorksG (9 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			That seems a bit barbed and rude tbh YorksG. I don't think any of us need to produce our birth certificates or cv to be believed!
		
Click to expand...



I was merely pointing out that working with such complex issues was unlikely to be entrusted to a 16 year old.

JFTD You may consider my thinking illogical and flawed, but the information you gave was factually incorect, which in the context of this thread was unfortunate. The reason I used the example of a major mental illness was that over time many scientists have believed that they had the evidence to show where it was lodged and what caused it. Time and open minded research has shown that such evidence, peer reviewed as it was, was dmagingly incorrect. The mind and the psyche are, as yet, too complex for our research methods.


----------



## FionaM12 (9 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			I was merely pointing out that working with such complex issues was unlikely to be entrusted to a 16 year old.
		
Click to expand...

Which suggests it was a lie. Which is rather rude, don't you think?


----------



## YorksG (9 March 2013)

FionaM12 said:



			Which suggests it was a lie. Which is rather rude, don't you think? 

Click to expand...

I would have said that I was suggesting an exageration, which appears to have been correct. Given the number of times, on this thread, when others have accused me of telling lies, I think this is considerably less rude.


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			That is not what im saying,to you or the others who base your beliefs on science and its foundations. 
it is the intolerance of others beliefs that is arrogent and rude, you are entitled to your beliefs and can have them without belittling others, what they believe in is as valid as yours, and Booboos dressing up your intolerance with your " im having trouble responding attitude" let me try and explain it to the intelectually inferior " your superior attitude still doesnt make mine or their beliefs less valid than yours.
		
Click to expand...

This is where you deny logic.

Merely believing something does not make it valid, nor even true. Again you are mixing up your right to hold a belief, with the question of the truth of that belief. Just because you believe something doesn't make it true.

I may believe that the capital of Italy is Paris, that doesn't make it so, but it can still be my belief.

If by 'valid' you mean 'valuable' that is also wrong, not all beliefs are equally valuable. There is little value in believing things that are wrong and there is no value in some beliefs, e.g. racist beliefs.

I don't base my arguments on science, I know very little science and I am not a scientist, I base my arguments on reason.


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			It is not your beliefs, which you are quite entitled to hold, which have earned you the epithet 'arrogant' but rather your manner of belittling others' beliefs and experiences.  You have twice posted your version of conversations (which never happened) in response to posters experiences in direct contradiction of what the posters had just said.  That can only be called arrogant.
It is quite understandable that having been taken in by a charlatan yourself, you have become somewhat evangelical on the subject.  However some of us had a wide knowledge, including professional qualifications, and experience of psychology before any involvement whatsoever with a 'communicator' and are considerably less gullible than you admit to being, so you really don't need to worry about us.

Whilst we are quoting from fantastical literature, I recommend that you try to 'believe 6 impossible things before breakfast' (Lewis Carroll), you will find that it enriches your life experience.

The psychologist in me always finds it amusing that one poster in particular likes to divert a thread when she is losing an argument.
		
Click to expand...

As a scientist, a psychologist, who has come across evidence that radically changes what science believes about the possibility of mind reading, are you not at all tempted to publish the results? You are sitting on a piece of evidence so astounding and so well guarded against being a con, but you don't want to do us the favour of at least sharing it with us if not a professional journal?

I have to admit that as a researcher I couldn't keep such amazing news to myself.


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

It was not an exaggeration - I was involved in projects at a pharma company in a neurology research and development group. I said it had been 5-10 years since I worked on this. And furthermore I dispute the information I have given is incorrect. I think you are coming at this from a psych background (am I wrong?) which doesn't sit well with my molecular background. Different perspectives. You disagree, fine, I can accept that, but do try to keep some perspective


----------



## Pearlsasinger (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			As a scientist, a psychologist, who has come across evidence that radically changes what science believes about the possibility of mind reading, are you not at all tempted to publish the results? You are sitting on a piece of evidence so astounding and so well guarded against being a con, but you don't want to do us the favour of at least sharing it with us if not a professional journal?

I have to admit that as a researcher I couldn't keep such amazing news to myself.
		
Click to expand...

Did you not read my earlier posts?


----------



## Hippona (9 March 2013)

Littlelegs.....you have said exactly what I have been trying to say....only better.

I would like to add....it is only down to Terry Pratchett and red wine that I have posted again on this thread....
JFTD.....Im with you.And Twoflower


----------



## Pearlsasinger (9 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			It was not an exaggeration - I was involved in projects at a pharma company in a neurology research and development group. I said it had been 5-10 years since I worked on this. And furthermore I dispute the information I have given is incorrect. I think you are coming at this from a psych background (am I wrong?) which doesn't sit well with my molecular background. Different perspectives. You disagree, fine, I can accept that, but do try to keep some perspective 

Click to expand...

I would be really interested to know how involved a pharma company allows a work-experience student to get in its projects, having supervised w/e students myself, who could barely be trusted to make the tea.


----------



## Booboos (9 March 2013)

Pearlsasinger said:



			Did you not read my earlier posts?
		
Click to expand...

The bit where you said that instead of answering the question someone changes the topic?


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

I wasn't a work experience student  I really don't think it would be appropriate for me to discuss the matter more 'fully' on a public forum, since it would divulge the nature of my work and my former employers, which would be pretty bad form.

Hippona, I am reading his short stories at the moment (when I put my phone down  ) I rather like the following:

'Captain vimes believed in logic in much the same way as a man in the desert believes in ice - ie it was something he really needed, but this just wasn't the place for it


----------



## glamourpuss (9 March 2013)

You know I keep banging on about people wanting to hear things in a reading, that they take the information given & make it fit what they want to hear?
This thread is a perfect example of this. I keep being told I've accused people of lying! But I haven't not once! In fact the opposite,I've said I don't think anyone is lying!

As for the conversations I have guessed at. Yes they were crap attempts but they are how these people work/talk.

I actually wasn't ripped off or taken in by a charlatan. I was initially very excited about my reading. They had known things they couldn't possibly have known etc. it was only later when my analytical side kicked in I saw it for what it REALLY was. 

Here are 2 readings. One from one of the top Psychics in the US & one from one of the top pysychics in the UK.
All I ask is you watch them & really ask yourself what information the reader is giving & what is actually being given by the girl being read. 
http://youtu.be/dh2IlmaCOVQ


----------



## glamourpuss (9 March 2013)

Oh sorry & the uk one

http://youtu.be/K14sIoE8qT4


----------



## Hippona (9 March 2013)

Oops....phone went mad. Never mind.
JFTD.....i have been inspired to start at the beginning again.....just stolen The colour of magic from my son


----------



## Flame_ (9 March 2013)

I've just remembered I had something like a reading done by the woman that used to be in the Trafford Centre when it first opened (mainly for entertainment purposes but, you know, just to see if I could be blown away by one of these "it has to be true, they couldn't have known that, etc", experiences). Obviously it wasn't a memorable experience, lol. 

I'm a weird woman. I hate shopping, at the time I had no OH and had no particular interest in finding one, I prefer physical work, care little about what I look like, you get the idea. Not that strange for a horsey woman maybe, but still fairly unusual generally speaking. Everything she talked about was the stuff a "typical" twenty-ish woman would want to hear. Barely any of it applied to me or even interested me IIRC, but it was the sort of stuff romantics would have lapped up. At least she didn't try telling me she'd been chatting to some dead relative or anything, but it was BS none the less. 

If I could read minds I'd use it to blackmail people for their secrets, and I'm sure so would psychics if they were really any good.


----------



## Regandal (9 March 2013)

Wasn't there something in the news a short while ago about science discovering a "God" thingy?  Can't remember the exact details, but it might have had something to do with energy. Best pseudo-science I came across was "Angels & Demons" by the guy who wrote the Davinci Code. Fabulous.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			This is where you deny logic.

Merely believing something does not make it valid, nor even true. Again you are mixing up your right to hold a belief, with the question of the truth of that belief. Just because you believe something doesn't make it true.

I may believe that the capital of Italy is Paris, that doesn't make it so, but it can still be my belief.

If by 'valid' you mean 'valuable' that is also wrong, not all beliefs are equally valuable. There is little value in believing things that are wrong and there is no value in some beliefs, e.g. racist beliefs.

I don't base my arguments on science, I know very little science and I am not a scientist, I base my arguments on reason.
		
Click to expand...

Excuse me, dont tell me what i mean to say, i do mean valid, and youve not answered my question, how do you measure love ? How do we prove it exists, it does of that we are sure, but it cant be quantified, or pidgeon holed, its based on trust and belief. You continually try to talk down to people who hold beliefs that are based on the spiritual .
We could argue the point back and forth but i cant see us agreeing therefore i will agree to disagree with you


----------



## glamourpuss (9 March 2013)

Marydoll there are things that can be measured with respect to love. Physical reactions within our body when we see the person we love & hormone excretion. This isn't just physical attraction either studies have been done on Parents & children as well.  MRI scans have shown that certain areas of the brain respond differently when we see pictures of our love ones. 
So there are aspects of love that can be measured.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Marydoll there are things that can be measured with respect to love. Physical reactions within our body when we see the person we love & hormone excretion. This isn't just physical attraction either studies have been done on Parents & children as well.  MRI scans have shown that certain areas of the brain respond differently when we see pictures of our love ones. 
So there are aspects of love that can be measured.
		
Click to expand...

Yes there are aspects of it that can be measured i agree, but that is in the main the physical attraction. Love can be be proven to exist, but it cant be quantified and for most of us we dont insist our loved ones, or people we love submit to a battery of tests before we form relationships, we take it on trust and faith


----------



## JFTDWS (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			Yes there are aspects of it that can be measured i agree, but that is in the main the physical attraction. Love can be be proven to exist, but it cant be quantified and for most of us we dont insist our loved ones, or people we love submit to a battery of tests before we form relationships, we take it on trust and faith 

Click to expand...

Do you mean my "strength of your love" assault course is putting off my potential mates?  Is that where I've been going wrong?


----------



## glamourpuss (9 March 2013)

That is true it is mostly taken on trust on faith but the point is it has shown by experiments & research to exist.....& so we go full circle the point there is nothing to prove that people can communicate with animals or have psychic ability.


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			That is true it is mostly taken on trust on faith but the point is it has shown by experiments & research to exist.....& so we go full circle the point there is nothing to prove that people can communicate with animals or have psychic ability.
		
Click to expand...

Yes we do seem to have got side tracked, but personally i have no issue with people who want to pay people to "talk to their animals" and believe in what these people tell them


----------



## Marydoll (9 March 2013)

JFTD said:



			Do you mean my "strength of your love" assault course is putting off my potential mates?  Is that where I've been going wrong?  

Click to expand...

Quite possibly


----------



## Pearlsasinger (9 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			Here are 2 readings. One from one of the top Psychics in the US & one from one of the top pysychics in the UK.
All I ask is you watch them & really ask yourself what information the reader is giving & what is actually being given by the girl being read. 
http://youtu.be/dh2IlmaCOVQ

Click to expand...

I'm afraid you are missing the point.  Perhaps you are reading only that which you which to see?  As I have said before, I completely agree that many 'mediums' etc are charlatans but not all are IMO.

The two conversations which you guessed at were not only erroneous but also completely irrelevant.  The 2 'readings' posted about were not done in the presence of the person the reading was for.  One was done with a photograph of a horse and reported by email, with no on-going interaction with the horse-owner.  The other was given over the phone and again, the recipient reports that there was no interaction.  Therefore there can have been no 'reading', cold or otherwise of either recipient.


----------



## diamonddogs (9 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			Yes we do seem to have got side tracked, but personally i have no issue with people who want to pay people to "talk to their animals" and believe in what these people tell them
		
Click to expand...

What a fascinating, and at times, hilarious thread!

I honestly believe that, say I've lost my nerve riding (actually, I have) and a communicator comes to have a word with my horse, and tells me my horse has said that if I stand on my head, spin round, click my heels three times and say "Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more" everything will be fine, that'll be twenty five quid please, so I try it and lo and behold, I'm cantering towards a 4ft jump screaming "Yee-haar", does it really matter if it was so much bull***** if it did the trick? The mind is a very powerful thing!

I'm not sure it's fair to say they're all charlatans either - it's a safe bet that many communicators, good or bad, actually themselves BELIEVE what they're saying is true, which does not make them frauds or tricksters.

I'd say 75% are genuine, believing they do have a gift, 20% a rip-off artists, and 5% have a similar gift/talent as Derren Brown - the ability to read the owner. My definition of a confidence trickster is someone who charges a shed load of hard-earned to impart what they know is total rubbish.

As far as stolen horses disclosing their whereabouts to the authorities, I'm an avid reader of true crime, and have lost count of the number of psychics and clairvoyants who have taken their visions and claims to the police, were rapidly shown the door having left a statement, only to be vindicated when the crimes have eventually been solved.



Serephin said:



			I prefer to have an open mind.  

It is sheer arrogance, or perhaps fear, to imagine you understand everything on heaven and earth, a condition that the human race constantly suffers for.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with this - generally I'm quite a down to earth person who needs proof of everything but we simply have to accept there is such a lot we don't know about the human psyche.


----------



## Alyth (10 March 2013)

I guess it's like religion - you either believe or you don't.....imo there is so much we don't understand or know about ..yet...!!!  So perhaps it is best not to decry or denigrate other peoples opinions but have an open mind and say 'anything is possible'....and accept that we are all different - not worse/ignorant/better - just different....


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

Marydoll said:



			Excuse me, dont tell me what i mean to say, i do mean valid, and youve not answered my question, how do you measure love ? How do we prove it exists, it does of that we are sure, but it cant be quantified, or pidgeon holed, its based on trust and belief. You continually try to talk down to people who hold beliefs that are based on the spiritual .
We could argue the point back and forth but i cant see us agreeing therefore i will agree to disagree with you
		
Click to expand...

I am not telling you what you mean to say, I am telling you what the words mean and that what you say is not compatible with what the words mean. 

For example, take you comment to Gloi when he/she said "Anything that has no rhyme or reason to it is automatically invalid" and you replied "In your opinion" - this reply can only be a joke (perhaps you did intend it as a joke, in which case the following is boring for you, just skip to love below).

Gloi's comment is a tautology, an argument which is definitionally true and therefore cannot be denied without inconsistency, like "All batchelors are unmarried men". Provided you understand the terms and are not applying them sarcastically, this sentence is true, always true and true for everyone regardless of anybody's opinion on the matter because 'batchelor' means 'unmarried man'.

An invalid argument is an argument whose conclusion does not follow from the premises, a non-sensical argument, an argument with no rhyme or reason. Hence Gloi's sentence is always and necessarily true, not true in anyone's opinion.


----------



## Patterdale (10 March 2013)

'Im getting the name............John. Do we have a John in the audience?'



'Your mother, she were quite young when she died, am I right?'

'94'

'Ah...but.....but she were young at heart weren't she? Young in herself?'

'Oh yes, that was mum alright. (He's good, this fella!)'


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

On the proof of love we need to clarify the question:

1. Do we mean do we have personal proof that love exists? Well, setting aside possibilities of gross self-deceit I can know on a first personal level that I feel love, to the same extent that I can know that I feel pain, fear, excitment, etc. Since these are our own experiences and the conclusion is how we feel, introspection is sufficient proof.

An interlude here to point out that the type of proof one looks for has to be relevant to the entreprise one is trying to prove. If I am trying to prove that not all swans are white, all I need is a black swan, but a black swan is not also proof of anything else I need to prove, suitable proof will vary in each case. So in the case of the possibility of ME feeling love all I need is the first personal experience of love.

2. Can we prove that others love us? Well here we are immediately stuck we the other minds problem, i.e. we can't prove that other minds exist as we don't have first personal experience of being them (exactly like the movie The Matrix). Putting such global doubts aside we have evidence about a person's character from their actions, i.e. a loving person will behave lovingly in situations that require the expression of love, e.g. she will be loyal, supportive and understanding of the loved on. This is not conclusive proof, as someone may be faking all these motives, but it is as much proof as the subject matter allows.

3. We can have disproof of love though, as some actions are incompatible with the profession of love, e.g. a man who regularly beats up his wife black and blue cannot consistently claim to love her as this is not the behaviour of a loving person.

When it comes to psychics the evidence we need for proving the case is fairly straight-forward, i.e. we pop a psychic and a horse in very well controlled laboratory conditions with no (other) means of communication and eliminating the possibility of conspirators, show the horse random objects and the psychic tells us what they are - easy-peasy and proves mind reading. Sadly no psychic has ever passed this test and most refuse to sit it.


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

Alyth said:



			I guess it's like religion - you either believe or you don't.....imo there is so much we don't understand or know about ..yet...!!!  So perhaps it is best not to decry or denigrate other peoples opinions but have an open mind and say 'anything is possible'....and accept that we are all different - not worse/ignorant/better - just different....
		
Click to expand...

Most religions expect people to accept the existence of god on faith and faith is exactly the lack of reason and proof (hence the expression 'leap of faith', you mentally jump into faith rather than reason your way to it). While some religions allow for miracles, none (to my knowldge) make miracles or other displays of divine power necessary as proof of god's existence.

Why should we rely on faith to prove a human faculty like mind reading? If someone says that they can see or hear we can test this by going to the optometrist and the ENT specialist, we don't accept it on faith. If someone says that they can read minds well they can prove it. Interestingly no psychic shows up any activity in fMRI scans while they are reading minds.

If anything is possible then other people being wrong is possible! But that in itself is not huge cause for concern, we are all wrong, all the time. It would be weird to try to deny this. The problem is the refusal to accept that one is wrong when all the evidence points in that direction. 

None of this means that we are not all worthy of equal respect as inherently valuable human beings. We can still matter (morally speaking) even though we hold beliefs that are wrong from time to time.


----------



## Foxhunter49 (10 March 2013)

There is no explaining many of the psychic events that occur. There are people who have a gift of being able to 'read' events that they know nothing about both past and present. I se that there could be people who can do the same with animals but I have yet to meet one!

I have always been a bit 'fey' knowing things that I have no experience of. It is not as it I have dreamed it but more that I have heard it or read it. An example of this was many years ago when I was on a tube in London. I was sitting next to a smart man who was reading The Times. 
For no reason at all I turned and out m hand on his arm and said "Excuse me sir, are you travelling to America?" 
He looked at me and replied "Yes, I am going home for Christmas."
I then said to him, "Please change your flight, do not travel on 103."
he looked at me as if I was nuts. I had no clue as to what I was saying or why.
He asked me, "Why do you say that?"
"I do not know, it is as if I read it in your paper but please do not go on 103."
I had no valid reason for coming out with such thing, it was something that without thinking I blurted out.

I thought it strange for a couple of days and then forgot it. About three weeks later there was the Lockerbie disaster - flight 103. 

Absolutely no explanation of why I 'knew' or said what I did. It was not the first time it had happened, nor the last.

I am a great believer with horses of 'thinking' in pictures as to what I want a horse to do and generally it works. 

I have had many psychic experiences with horses in that I have suddenly been woken from a deep sleep knowing that something is wrong and gone to investigate to be proven correct. Found a horse cast or sick.
One night I was awoken by pebbles being thrown against my bedroom window. On looking out there was an elderly man, dressed in a brown farmers coat pointing towards the barn. I went to see to find a horse had rolled, got under the feed trough in the loose barn, and lifted the trough off the catches and was well and truly trapped. The man just vanished. He appeared another time on a filthy night, he was pointing down across the field. I went to investigate and he just kept ahead of me. WHen he started down across the field I turned and got the ATV. I had no horses out but, having been 'told' by him before I was going to follow. 
My collie was also following this man.
Across one field and into the next he stopped and pointed to the woods. I drove across to look and found a neighbours heifer upside down in the ditch, in danger of drowning. When I looked back the man had gone. 
These things, and many others, make me believe that there are clairvoyants but generally there are more charlatans than there are genuine. 
The person who turns up and says that a horse doesn't like a certain colour or is missing a friend is more than likely saying what an owner wants to hear. Reading people is not difficult. Body language gives much away. 
I have only met one animal communicator - she was a top American and had been on TV and read pets for many stars. She was good in that she read people very well but, not the animals. What she said about one horse was 100% incorrect and when I told her this she was very quick to say "Well, this was in a previous life."
She had been brought over to read a horse in race training. She said he wanted all sorts of things to make him better. It was all carried out but never worked. 
I, not an animal communicator, knew what the horse needed. He needed a change in his routine. He came to me, was hunted for a season, freshened up, went to a different trainer and won several races afterwards. 

It seems to me that the people who use these communicators have problems with their animals, they do not know how to solve the problem(s) so resort to paying in desperation and hearing what they want to hear.
A good reader will hit on  some truths, the owner will give clues by their reaction even on the phone. They will take what they want to hear and forget the rest.


----------



## glamourpuss (10 March 2013)

Wow Foxhunter49 what an interesting post & nice to see another person who, despite personal experience which you can't explain, you seem able to see reason & evidence behind so say animal communication & psychics.

Pearlasinger how the readings are done is irrelevant whether it be by phone or email the premise is the same except there isn't the instant feedback from the person being read. The written ones just rely more heavily on Barnum statements & our confirmation bias & heavily on confirmation of incomplete evidence (cherry picking) 
I'll admit again my attempts to recreate the 'conversations' were clumsy BUT there is no denying this is how these conversations & readings go hence the 2 you tube examples - the UK one is hilarious. 

I recently went on a self defence course. The teacher talked about intuition & people trusting their intuition. He however didn't tell us this intuition was something magical he just said it was us picking up on the tiny, almost impossible to see clues being given to us constantly, usually not even registering consciously.


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

Would we agree that some people are more "in tune" with instinct/ gut feeling and so may appear to have psychic abilities then? Im sure many of us have had experiences where we feel the urgent random need to do or check on something and find that someone or something needs our help, or we manage to avoid a disaster etc......is our subconcious picking up on something? Is it psychic ability....or is it in fact the same thing?


----------



## glamourpuss (10 March 2013)

Hippona I do agree with you, the gut feeling is the ability to pick up on the tiny clues being given.

I mentioned earlier that I don't even think that these readers are being intentional fraudsters. I honestly think that for the majority their ability to pick up on the tiny clues or use phraseology which supports cherry picking is so innate to them that it feels like they are reading minds/communicating with animals or spirits.


----------



## Gloi (10 March 2013)

Regandal said:



			Wasn't there something in the news a short while ago about science discovering a "God" thingy?  Can't remember the exact details, but it might have had something to do with energy. Best pseudo-science I came across was "Angels & Demons" by the guy who wrote the Davinci Code. Fabulous.
		
Click to expand...

LOL!
There is no god involved in the Higgs boson.
The nickname for the Higgs boson is attributed to Leon Lederman, who wrote a book 'The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?'. Lederman had originally intended to refer to it as the "goddamn particle" due to the difficulty in detecting it but the name got changed by the publisher and has been picked up by the mass media.
confession - I like reading books on quantum physics but I still hardly understand it.


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

So....if some people are more instinctive and intuitive than others.....does it follow that certain sensitive people are actually able to "see" that which is not visible to others? Several posters have mentioned sightings of spirits...or of people/ animals that were not "really" there or not seen by others. This is where the  subject of proof/evidence becomes frustrating isnt it....because people do sense or see things which cannot be quantified or reproduced .....nevertheless they are real experiences.......


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			So....if some people are more instinctive and intuitive than others.....does it follow that certain sensitive people are actually able to "see" that which is not visible to others? Several posters have mentioned sightings of spirits...or of people/ animals that were not "really" there or not seen by others. This is where the  subject of proof/evidence becomes frustrating isnt it....because people do sense or see things which cannot be quantified or reproduced .....nevertheless they are real experiences.......
		
Click to expand...

Reading body language, being quick on the uptake, noticing details that escape others, being more aware of emotional changes in others, etc. are definitely abilities some people have more than others. You can even see people at the other end of the scale, e.g. people on the autistic spectrum often have difficulties in seeing the subtle communication clues that make social interaction possible.

Being aware of psychological phenomenal like confirmation bias, memory reconstruction, peer group influence, etc. also makes us less likely to be affected by these biases (plenty of studies out there on all of that, if anyone is interested PM me for some examples).

However all this can be both quantified and reproduced under laboratory conditions and does not warrant the inference that there are ghosts, fairies, magical powers or mind reading.


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

glamourpuss said:



			All I ask is you watch them & really ask yourself what information the reader is giving & what is actually being given by the girl being read. 
http://youtu.be/dh2IlmaCOVQ

Click to expand...

I only just got round to seeing a few minutes of this, then had to stop it. This is nothing short of abuse of that young woman. If she were my daughter and that psychic had done that to her you would have to stop me from physical violence.


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

Again.....we are back to the point that people DO see things that others do not/cannot. 
Even if we do not draw inference from gut feeling/instinct and the existence of spirits......and seperate the two.....do you say to people who HAVE seen inexplicable phenomena that they   have not? Surely its subjective, and you cannot say with certainty that someone must not have seen  something on the basis that you cannot? Or would you put it down to trick of the light etc?


----------



## fburton (10 March 2013)

YorksG said:



			My understanding is that the earth is an ovid, with flattened 'points' at the poles, therefore it is not 'round' like a football, which was the belief after the earth was proven not to be flat.
		
Click to expand...

Technically speaking, the earth is approximately geoid (which means earth-shaped) - only approximately, because it has bumps and grooves on its surface, which the geoid doesn't.

I wouldn't be surprised if the earth was as 'round' as a typical football - the difference between the shape of the earth and a perfect sphere is about 1 part in 300. I don't think someone far enough away from the earth to see the whole thing would be able to tell the difference between it and a sphere.


----------



## fburton (10 March 2013)

horserider said:



			Me, I don't believe in Scientists, they get it wrong so many times.
		
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I go further than you - I don't believe in _people_ because they get it wrong so many times. How sad is that?


----------



## Pearlsasinger (10 March 2013)

Foxhunter49 said:



			There is no explaining many of the psychic events that occur. There are people who have a gift of being able to 'read' events that they know nothing about both past and present. I se that there could be people who can do the same with animals but I have yet to meet one!

.........................................................................................................


It seems to me that the people who use these communicators have problems with their animals, they do not know how to solve the problem(s) so resort to paying in desperation and hearing what they want to hear.
A good reader will hit on  some truths, the owner will give clues by their reaction even on the phone. They will take what they want to hear and forget the rest.
		
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, no money changed hands, YorksG merely answered a request from a student for help.  We were extremely sceptical and knew a great deal about the horse's history - we have seen her breeders at many shows over the years, even before we bought her, so were fairly sure that we were unlikely to believe any 'wooliness' in  reading.  There were no problems with the horse, she was and still is a healthy, happy well-mannered horse.  The things the AC told us were merely interesting, in that they were true, particular to that horse and factual.


----------



## Foxhunter49 (10 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			So....if some people are more instinctive and intuitive than others.....does it follow that certain sensitive people are actually able to "see" that which is not visible to others? Several posters have mentioned sightings of spirits...or of people/ animals that were not "really" there or not seen by others. This is where the  subject of proof/evidence becomes frustrating isnt it....because people do sense or see things which cannot be quantified or reproduced .....nevertheless they are real experiences.......
		
Click to expand...

I believe that this is so. 
ESP is often looked down on and when a child, and children are far more perceptive than most adults, comes out with something like 'Granddad was sat on the end of my bed reading a story,' when Granddad had been dead for a couple of years, it is passed over. 

The first 'experience' I remember was when I was about 8 years, I was very ill with a bad migraine. The man who collected insurance money had called and he always teased me. He had, as usual, had a coffee with Mum and as he was leaving he said to Mum "See you next week."
Mum came into m room to see if there was anything I wanted and I told her that she wouldn't see him again because he was going to be run over by a bicycle and die.
Mum naturally told me that I shouldn't say such things, it wasn't very nice.

A few days later the man was walking up a hill near his home, he suffered a massive heart attack and fell into the road in the path of a cyclist who couldn't avoid him
OK it was a heart attack that killed him but a cyclist was involved! 
When you see things like this, even as a child you do not go around stating the fact. Adults will tell you it is not nice and so you learn to just keep them to yourself. 
I often wonder if I had worked at it and had some training whether I would have been able to communicate with the other side!


----------



## Booboos (10 March 2013)

Hippona said:



			Again.....we are back to the point that people DO see things that others do not/cannot. 
Even if we do not draw inference from gut feeling/instinct and the existence of spirits......and seperate the two.....do you say to people who HAVE seen inexplicable phenomena that they   have not? Surely its subjective, and you cannot say with certainty that someone must not have seen  something on the basis that you cannot? Or would you put it down to trick of the light etc?
		
Click to expand...

It depends on the circumstances and I am no doctor but for example if someone was experiencing visual hallucinations I would be concerned about problems with their brain, e.g. tumous, neurological problems, e.g. seizures, disturbances of the visual cortex, problems with the brain's chemistry, e.g. metabolic disorders, sleep disorders, migraines, problems with vision, psychoses,  etc.

Some of these problems may be ongoing and undiagnosed, e.g. seizures can go undiagnosed and may be accompanied by visual hallucinations.

In fact some hallucinations are very spefically linked to physiological disorders so that by mentioning the hallucination we know what the physical problem is. For example, sleep paralysis disorder (which is a fairly common problem, even if you do a search on HHO you will find threads on it atlhough it is not always recognised by its official name) is associated with specific hallucinations: either a man in the room, or a creature at different historical times interpreted as a demon or an alien. Given that this disorder also causes feelings of extreme panic, pressure on the chest and feelings of being in great danger, all while being almost completely paralyzed you can kind of see why people's imaginations runswild.

Here is a short study attributing alien abduction experiences to sleep paralysis:
http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/ejufoas00.html

Now add to all this our tendency to misinterpret coincidence for causation, confirmation bias and restructuring of memories and you have a complete explanation.


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

Yes....all that is true  ...as is what comes next.
OH's cousin (K) is clairvoyant. Sees dead people. Its not something she makes known for reasons clearly demonstrated on this thread. Shes not ill, no brain tumours....its a family trait. My daughter used to see spirits when she was younger.....too you to lie, make associations etc etc. K told me the reason our son was having disturbed sleep was that he was being visited by an old lady ....that he couldnt see her, and that my daughter then aged 3 could and had seen her. 2 weeks prior to that, daughter had asked me who the grey lady was who was following us on the lane....there was nobody  there, I asked daughter where she had gone and daughter said she had floated into the sky...
I asked K where daughter had seen this old lady.....K was able to describe exactly where we were when it happened, somewhere she has never been. K then said the old lady was  telling her she was my gran, and she was seeing a picture of my gran standing on my landing, slamming the bathroom door. 
None of the doors on the upstairs of my house drift shut, they all have to be physically moved because they were hung before the carpets. You can have every window open and none of them move.....except that evening when we were going upstairs and the bathroom door slammed shut...
We spent ages trying to make it do it again.....in 12 years of living at this house in all kinds of situations its never done it before or since.We jumped around on the landing....opened windows, wafted other doors.....nothing. It HAS to be physically moved.
So whilst I agree with what youve written Booboos.....I still cannot discount my own experiences....I still am certain theres things that cannot be explained away


----------



## 1stclassalan (10 March 2013)

Booboos said:



			When it comes to psychics the evidence we need for proving the case is fairly straight-forward, i.e. we pop a psychic and a horse in very well controlled laboratory conditions with no (other) means of communication and eliminating the possibility of conspirators, show the horse random objects and the psychic tells us what they are - easy-peasy and proves mind reading. Sadly no psychic has ever passed this test and most refuse to sit it.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, when I tried to test this out - they picked a heterophobic gelding who held a grudge against me for preferring mares so he conveyed the wrong images to get back at me!


----------



## Foxhunter49 (10 March 2013)

The problem with science is that it wants to prove _everything_ and when it cannot it will pooh pooh the whole idea. Then a few years later something will be proven when old folk law had said it all along. 

I have met many excellent clairvoyants - the most outstanding was Jess. 
My little sister returned an empty Coke bottle to a cafe where I was working. Jess was at the counter. 
My sis placed the bottle and was walking out when Jess called her back. "Little girl, come here I have something to tell you." 
My sister was then spoken to for a few minutes. Later she told me that the woman had told her she was going to be in a competition, and that she and her partner would win but, to not be in a hurry as there was going to be a second part to the competition and neither she nor her partner would look so smart but they would still win and rtake home a great big cup.

Months later at a show my sis was riding in a riding class, she was not on her usual pony but on a bigger one. She won. As her next class was jumping she took her jacket off, unplaited the pony. Next thing there was an announcement that 1st and 2nds in classes 1, 2 & 3 were to ride off for a cup just presented.   
Sis was the youngest by far. She was upset as her jacket was trodden on, the pony not plaited but she won a very hideous cup about 2 feet tall.
Only as she came out the ring did she recall what she had been told. 
Jess had 'read' it all in the empty Coke bottle and, believe me that woman could read a glass of water very accurately.


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

To add......on our house the bathroom door opens outwards....onto the landing. It was in my line of sight through the spindles all my way up the stairs....I could quite clearly see where it was....where it akways


----------



## Hippona (10 March 2013)

To add......on our house the bathroom door opens outwards....onto the landing. It was in my line of sight through the spindles all my way up the stairs....I could quite clearly see where it was....where it always is...and I saw it suddenly from nothing shut quickly....not a gentle movement, but most definately as though it had been yanked shut.OH was there and he saw it too...


----------



## fburton (10 March 2013)

Foxhunter49 said:



			The problem with science is that it wants to prove _everything_ and when it cannot it will pooh pooh the whole idea.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I recognize that characterization of science.

The idea that science wants to prove things is discussed here - along with other misconceptions about what science is and does, and pointers into other articles on stuff like how science works:

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/teaching/misconceptions.php


----------



## FionaM12 (11 March 2013)

Just saw this on facebook. a word (or two ) from Morgan Freeman to homophobic horses or people everywhere.


----------



## 1stclassalan (11 March 2013)

Foxhunter49 said:



			The problem with science is that it wants to prove _everything_

Click to expand...

_
No. You are quite WRONG about this. Science only wants to explain how matters got to be the the way they are in the fields where some form of prediction might be in order. Thus, as there's a lot of stuff done that needs aeroplanes - there's an awful lot of puzzling done to see if they be made to fly better, faster, higher more fuel efficient etc., but the requirement for proving or disproving whether I can get a message from long dead Aunt Agatha will be well down the list of priorities - unless there's a big missing pot of gold!! And then - I'm told by my "clairvoyant" neighbour - you know the one that needs help with the weather forecast - that it doesn't work like that and he only gets random messages from a Red Indian - and there's no chance my racist Aunt will ever be talking - alive or dead to a native savage!!!




			and when it cannot it will pooh pooh the whole idea.
		
Click to expand...

Well, it might be fun to have to have the odd swipe but in the main, science is quite happy to leave you all wallowing in your sloughs of mysticism along with the 911 no planers, Moon walk deniers and torch beam alien abductees.




			Then a few years later something will be proven when old folk law had said it all along.
		
Click to expand...

Name me ONE THING that science has poo-pooed as you call it - to have it later proved - PROVED mark you!_


----------



## fburton (11 March 2013)

1stclassalan said:



			Name me ONE THING that science has poo-pooed
		
Click to expand...

E.coli?


----------



## 1stclassalan (11 March 2013)

fburton said:



			E.coli?
		
Click to expand...

You'll have to be rather more specific than that - after all to even be named E coli - the organism had to be described by science!

Orrr - have I just fallen for a wind-up?


----------



## Palindrome (11 March 2013)

fburton said:



			I'm not sure I recognize that characterization of science.

The idea that science wants to prove things is discussed here - along with other misconceptions about what science is and does, and pointers into other articles on stuff like how science works:

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/teaching/misconceptions.php

Click to expand...

Particularly like those:

"MISCONCEPTION: Science proves ideas.

CORRECTION: Journalists often write about "scientific proof" and some scientists talk about it, but in fact, the concept of proof  real, absolute proof  is not particularly scientific. Science is based on the principle that any idea, no matter how widely accepted today, could be overturned tomorrow if the evidence warranted it. Science accepts or rejects ideas based on the evidence; it does not prove or disprove them. To learn more about this, visit our page describing how science aims to build knowledge.

MISCONCEPTION: Science can only disprove ideas.

CORRECTION: This misconception is based on the idea of falsification, philosopher Karl Popper's influential account of scientific justification, which suggests that all science can do is reject, or falsify, hypotheses  that science cannot find evidence that supports one idea over others. Falsification was a popular philosophical doctrine  especially with scientists  but it was soon recognized that falsification wasn't a very complete or accurate picture of how scientific knowledge is built. In science, ideas can never be completely proved or completely disproved. Instead, science accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, and may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives."


----------



## Fellewell (11 March 2013)

All Purpose Late Twentieth Century Creed
I believe in my beliefs.
Its my belief that my beliefs
Are truer far than your beliefs,
And I believe that your beliefs
Are threatening to my beliefs,
So Im defending my beliefs
And all who hold the same beliefs
Against your dangerous beliefs
And who share your false beliefs
Or what I think are your beliefs.
And I will die for my beliefs;
And you will die for my beliefs.
And what, in fact, are my beliefs
Beyond the complicating reefs
Of tedious theology
And arid ideology?
The usual: a divine Creator,
Whose love rings earth like the Equator;
Justice and the Rule of Law
(And giving hand-outs to the poor);
Respect, of course, for  Mother Nature,
Care for every living creature;
And that in the pursuit of Peace
All wars (excepting mine) should cease.

By Simon Rae.


----------

