Long Island Medium fake or real?

[Nintii]

[Why not? . In fact you could name anything to have happened, something you don't understand, and better explain it within natural means than any 'a wizard did it' explanation. I mean surely there are more ordinary explanations for these things, other than magic.

 

I like your premise of " ... Dismissing extraordinary claims of the supernatural without extraordinary proof to back it up would be the default position ...".

This is a sound springboard to start from and should be basis of all such investigations ... the onus is on claimant and not on audience to verify their

claims.

 

Baboons are immune to scorpion stings and actually eat them as part of their diet and so as "muti magick" goes, all you need to do is to get a baboons

finger or some other body part and rub it onto the area where a scorpion has stung you and then according to this "nature magic" the immunity of the

baboon should transfer onto you.

This is a load of pure rubbish, my suggestion is to get your rear end to a hospital and quick.

 

This type of "magic" is what is normally presented by National Geographic and the obvious conclusion one reaches is that it's from some simple bunch of

ignorant people living out in the boondocks at the back end of nowhereland.

Our local witch doctors are part of that bunch and claim that if you have HIV AIDS then go and have sex with a "pure innocent child" and you will be cured.

This has led to untold acts of child rape in our country.

 

This type of magic is blatantly superstition, like putting your bed on bricks because the "tokoloshe" a short little demon is going to come around to your house

climb on your bed and "do you".

 

However, there is that which is real but I'm not going into it here.

[bben46]

Actually anyone can speak to the dead - getting them to answer is a bit harder though. :whistling:

 

For more info on how these fakes work, Google 'The Great Randi' He is a magician who can duplicate just about any psychic miracle and show you just how it is faked. In doing this he is following in the footsteps of another very well known stage magician - Harry Houdini who was also involved in exposing fake psychics.

[Vagrant0]

[Why not? . In fact you could name anything to have happened, something you don't understand, and better explain it within natural means than any 'a wizard did it' explanation. I mean surely there are more ordinary explanations for these things, other than magic.

However, there is that which is real but I'm not going into it here.

Except here's the thing. The problem is not that that there are things which are not immediately explainable, but that in some cases people are more willing to accept outlandish explanations for how something happened rather than look to science and physics of it. Part of the reason for this is due to the fact that most people are brought up on stories of ghosts, spirits, demons, and magic as a means of explaining things which are fairly hard to explain. The other part is that these supernatural explanations have much more appeal than a more technical explanation since they have this sense of mystery and danger to them.

 

Trying to toss away all supernatural belief as being related and complete hokey would be, I think, a mistake. In many cases there is definite evidence of something happening, but no "real" scientist would touch it with a 50 foot pole simply because it has been regarded as nonesense. By nature of discounting these things it only allows conmen and fakes the freedom to act within those subjects freely.

 

I won't really comment on tribal shamans and the like, but again it's not a good idea to discount everything just because of a few bad instances of logic. Modern medicine has learned a good deal of knowledge from their usage of plants and other natural compounds to cure disease simply because some doctors managed to look beyond the stuff that was outright wrong to find something useful.

 

Good science does not dismiss evidence, it seeks out ways to explain it through whatever means are available, or by noting it for further study when new means are available. That said, there is no evidence of anything new here which cannot be explained.

[Ghogiel]

Yeah. Even that putting your bed on bricks has practical merit, avoids creepy crawlies, however that reasoning behind it doing it, a little elf doing you, is totally BS, but it may be beneficial in practice. <there are good theories why we are susceptible to believing things like those stories, maybe an evolutionary trait that is tied into us having long and vulnerable childhood.

 

Anyway, while herb lore is an ancestor so to speak of modern pharmacology and those people were on to something, ie this herb is antiseptic or relieves cramps etc, That is where the line is drawn> you can explain all herb lore with modern chemistry and biology and demonstrate it works or doesn't. The AIDS thing is worse than totally irresponsible BS, it needs to go the way of the dodo. Like bleeding or leaching> we just know better now.

[marharth]

Actually anyone can speak to the dead - getting them to answer is a bit harder though. :whistling:

 

For more info on how these fakes work, Google 'The Great Randi' He is a magician who can duplicate just about any psychic miracle and show you just how it is faked. In doing this he is following in the footsteps of another very well known stage magician - Harry Houdini who was also involved in exposing fake psychics.

This

 

If you have even the slightest doubt that any of those people are legitimate, watch/read some of the stuff by James Randi.

[scottym23]

[Why not? . In fact you could name anything to have happened, something you don't understand, and better explain it within natural means than any 'a wizard did it' explanation. I mean surely there are more ordinary explanations for these things, other than magic.

However, there is that which is real but I'm not going into it here.

 

Trying to toss away all supernatural belief as being related and complete hokey would be, I think, a mistake. In many cases there is definite evidence of something happening, but no "real" scientist would touch it with a 50 foot pole simply because it has been regarded as nonesense. By nature of discounting these things it only allows conmen and fakes the freedom to act within those subjects freely.

 

Good science does not dismiss evidence, it seeks out ways to explain it through whatever means are available, or by noting it for further study when new means are available. That said, there is no evidence of anything new here which cannot be explained.

If someone claims something to be true, the burden of proof is on them. Until they can prove without a doubt that a specific supernatural act or belief is true without a doubt then it's considered fake. That's why scientists, psychologists, and sociologists run the most simple of tests to confirm the most basic of principles and facts that people see as common sense. If scientists must prove basic principles, then there would need to be a supernatural equivalent of study and evidence at the very least. And since there's not even a sliver of good hard evidence on the topic it's almost out of the realm of possibilities that supernatural events, beliefs, or anything exist.

[Vagrant0]

Like bleeding or leaching> we just know better now.

Actually, bleeding or using leaches has some actual merit in certain cases, the reason why it got such a bad view comes from the fact that it usually wasn't done in sanitary conditions, or done as a sort of default cure-all, or in cases where bleeding was the opposite of what needed to be done.

 

Leaches themselves actually inject antiseptic agents and anti-clotting agents into the bloodstream of their hosts as well as numb a small area. The only real bad part is that the leach either needs to detatch on its own, or be removed properly so that the digestive juices from the leach don't get squirted into your body or the skin around the opening doesn't get ripped off.

 

Fly larva (maggots) also have medical uses and can be rather good at removing dead and decaying tissue in a way that the sore or wound doesn't fester or start releasing toxins back into your system.

 

 

Not quite.

 

What you are failing to acknowledge is what sorts of claims are being made as not all claims carry with it the same amount of fact, and not all things are readily provable beyond a shadow of a doubt. Evolution for example. When it was proposed it was met with staunch opposition and many very smart people even called it madness. The only reason why it became an accepted theory is because it came from someone already established as a scientist, and ended up being supported by additional sources within the scientific community.

 

In science, there are two things that make up a theory or a fact... That is evidence and the conclusions which can be drawn from that evidence. The conclusions can still be wrong, but as long as the evidence remains reasonably consistent and repeatable within certain parameters, there is something with which to make an attempt at some conclusion based on that evidence. It really doesn't matter what claims are being made, what matters is if the evidence is recorded in a controlled environment or can be repeated.

 

The problem with almost everything supernatural is that most of the conclusions being made are not rooted in fact, and they are usually framed to try and prove something far beyond what the evidence on its own suggests. And many instances where people try some sort of scientific methodology, they do so poorly or quickly jump to conclusions. This is not the problem of the field or what is being studied so much as it is a problem with the people involved on all levels. Unfortunately since bad science tends to draw more interest and attention than good science, about all you have is bad science or outright frauds. The other problem stems from the fact that most of the evidence only exists within a certain set of undefined, unknown, or uncontrollable parameters which renders most experiments very basic or open to scrutiny and dismissal.

 

In the case of hauntings, some phenomena does repeat regularly and can be tested, just that in most situations the site cannot be realistically secured (hermetically sealed without tampering of variables) due to location or practically, which makes even an honest attempt trouble bound. There is also a lot of information out there which can mislead scientists toward what sorts of things they are actually looking for.

[Ghogiel]

Like bleeding or leaching> we just know better now.

Actually, bleeding or using leaches has some actual merit in certain cases, the reason why it got such a bad view comes from the fact that it usually wasn't done in sanitary conditions, or done as a sort of default cure-all, or in cases where bleeding was the opposite of what needed to be done.

 

As far as I am aware, it was virtually never used with merit. In it was likely harmful in all but a statistically negligible portion. Therefore largely the practice had no merit. Unlike today where we use leeches to promote blood flow to damaged tissue.

[scottym23]

Like bleeding or leaching> we just know better now.

Actually, bleeding or using leaches has some actual merit in certain cases, the reason why it got such a bad view comes from the fact that it usually wasn't done in sanitary conditions, or done as a sort of default cure-all, or in cases where bleeding was the opposite of what needed to be done.

 

Leaches themselves actually inject antiseptic agents and anti-clotting agents into the bloodstream of their hosts as well as numb a small area. The only real bad part is that the leach either needs to detatch on its own, or be removed properly so that the digestive juices from the leach don't get squirted into your body or the skin around the opening doesn't get ripped off.

 

Fly larva (maggots) also have medical uses and can be rather good at removing dead and decaying tissue in a way that the sore or wound doesn't fester or start releasing toxins back into your system.

 

 

Not quite.

 

What you are failing to acknowledge is what sorts of claims are being made as not all claims carry with it the same amount of fact, and not all things are readily provable beyond a shadow of a doubt. Evolution for example. When it was proposed it was met with staunch opposition and many very smart people even called it madness. The only reason why it became an accepted theory is because it came from someone already established as a scientist, and ended up being supported by additional sources within the scientific community.

 

In science, there are two things that make up a theory or a fact... That is evidence and the conclusions which can be drawn from that evidence. The conclusions can still be wrong, but as long as the evidence remains reasonably consistent and repeatable within certain parameters, there is something with which to make an attempt at some conclusion based on that evidence. It really doesn't matter what claims are being made, what matters is if the evidence is recorded in a controlled environment or can be repeated.

 

The problem with almost everything supernatural is that most of the conclusions being made are not rooted in fact, and they are usually framed to try and prove something far beyond what the evidence on its own suggests. And many instances where people try some sort of scientific methodology, they do so poorly or quickly jump to conclusions. This is not the problem of the field or what is being studied so much as it is a problem with the people involved on all levels. Unfortunately since bad science tends to draw more interest and attention than good science, about all you have is bad science or outright frauds. The other problem stems from the fact that most of the evidence only exists within a certain set of undefined, unknown, or uncontrollable parameters which renders most experiments very basic or open to scrutiny and dismissal.

 

In the case of hauntings, some phenomena does repeat regularly and can be tested, just that in most situations the site cannot be realistically secured (hermetically sealed without tampering of variables) due to location or practically, which makes even an honest attempt trouble bound. There is also a lot of information out there which can mislead scientists toward what sorts of things they are actually looking for.

 

I understand what you're trying to say and agree. I'll leave it with the fact that after years and years (and millions each year) of people claiming to have experienced supernatural behavior, there hasn't been a single shred of evidence that was indisputable enough to get huge attention. If "spirits" exist, and can communicate or interact with the physical world even in the slightest, the odds that not a single spirit would purposely try and make itself known or caught on camera after all this time is infinitely small. I can't bring myself to believe or even consider the possibility of anything supernatural existing with this in mind. But Just like James Randi, i'm not closed to the idea that it exists. "My mind is open to that possibility, but not so open my brain falls out." --James Randi. What a legend.

[Vagrant0]

I'll leave it with the fact that after years and years (and millions each year) of people claiming to have experienced supernatural behavior,

I'll have to cut you off there... Realistically speaking, it's only been within the last 100 years or so that science has differentiated enough from religious roots that any claim of supernatural events was even looked at from a scientific perspective. Things before then, and still today, are often investigated first by religious groups, atleast in the broader sense. And that is a big mess of stuff that we aren't going to touch with a 50 foot pole.

 

The fact that the last 200 years or so has seen a rather large incline of con-men and other frauds making a name for themselves by doing "supernatural" feats kinda makes it impossible to really know with certainty.

 

 

The other side of things is that really... Anyone who can do anything special (talk to the dead, heal with touch, sense things beyond normal senses, ect) wouldn't exactly benefit from telling anyone about it. In a best case scenario that person would be considered a fraud or lunatic and possibly medicated to the point of being a vegetable. Afterall, if someone really could talk to the dead, they would be literally surrounded by thousands of voices, everywhere and it would be indistinguishable from a psychological condition. In a worst case scenario, the person proves their ability and never has a moment that is not taken up by someone wanting help, wanting to confirm for their own agenda, wanting to study, or wanting to disprove. That is until someone just decides that they don't like what possibilities you're providing and kills you (which allows others dissect you), tricks you, or gives you a test that cannot succeed. All the while every fraud and con-artist is coming out of the woodwork to claim a similar ability since you just provided proof that it could exist. Some might even decide to allow themselves to be "found out" as a fraud or just come out and say it just to get back to a normal life. In short, it's a no-win situation that doesn't actually help anyone anywhere.

 

Arguably, the persecution that has happened worldwide for anyone doing anything outside the normal may have removed the concept of possibility from most of the Western world, so naturally anyone who might have some ability would be quick to dispute it on their own and forget about it. In other places it may not have the same level of disbelief, but would instead be impacted by small community reactions of either sheltering such a person as special, or shunning them as cursed.

 

The reality is that supernatural powers simply do not agree with the reality of the world, and if you buy the notion of a sort of paradigm shift, it doesn't exist (or rather cannot be seen) because the common human psyche as it currently stands cannot accept it existing. But I'll leave it at that since digging deeper can be a mix of combing through nonesense, wading through tin-hat land, and the sort of stuff that can make you stay awake at night in a cold sweat and generally damaging to how you see the world.