Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Clairvoyancy How did she do this?

  1. Aug 3, 2003 #1


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Today as I am walking down Hawthorne street in Portland, an elegantly dressed woman is sitting at a table with a sign saying, "Palm reading, $5". I decided to see what she had to say as I was curious to the validity of her profession. In 5 minutes, this woman named specific events in my life that happened and accurately told me when they happened, was able to determine I had 2 children, and named some of my personality traits so exact I was completely amazed. She did not however name much about my future. This is something I have heard that astrologers and true psychics do not do because ultimately they believe we have free will to choose our life path for the most part.

    How did she do this? She looked very briefly at my palm and was able to size me up as if she had known me for years. Is clairvoyancy an ability we can all have but in our current evolution we suppress it because we cannot scientifically explain it? I hope that if you wish to challenge this idea that you yourself will find a "reputable" clairvoyant and experience a reading.
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 4, 2003 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    You have two children? How unique is having two children? If you pick 10 women off the street who are married and in their mid-30s (guessing at your age), how many do you think will have two children? 5? 7?

    I think that "psychics" are just very good at knowing people and telling them what they want to hear. The attitude you have going in determines what you get out of it.

    Ever watch the show "Crossing Over"? I've seen parts of it half a dozen times, but I can only watch a couple of minutes at a time because it makes me physically ill watching that guy mess with people's heads like that. He'd make 3 or 4 wrong guesses in a row before guessing - 'its your dead father, right?' and people would be so impressed and moved. Ugh.

    But hey, Ms Cleo was taken down so maybe we're making progress.

    When I was a kid I told my sister I was telepathic. I told her to send me a message and I guessed right 3 times in a row. Does that make me telepathic? No, it just means I knew her pretty well.
  4. Aug 4, 2003 #3
    For the most part I agree with
    Russ that alot of "Clairvoyance"
    boils down to knowing how to fish
    for info in a subtle way and alot
    of practice in getting the most
    out of small pieces of info.

    In addition some of these people
    are exceptionally talented at
    picking up on and storing info
    about people in general. This
    woman, perhaps, figured out one
    day that there is a huge differe-
    nce in the way a woman who's had
    a child looks and behaves and the
    look and behaviour of one who
    hasn't. Then she went on to notice
    how a second child further mag-
    nifies these differences. And so
    on. Perhaps at four children she
    can no longer distinguish.

    On the other hand I've heard stor-
    ies about telepathic knowledge that can't be explained this way:
    people realizing a relative is in
    danger, that sort of thing. Or:
    you're thinking about someone you
    haven't seen in a long time; the
    phone rings and it's them.

    Like Russ, I think John Edwards
    and James van Pragh are what the
    Amazing Randy calls "mentalists".

  5. Aug 4, 2003 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    in order to be completely objective and scientific, perhaps you should try it?:wink:
  6. Aug 4, 2003 #5
    Re: Clairvoyancy

    i seem recall a study in which every student in a class was given a horoscope that named several personality traits "very accurately" to each student. upon sharing their horoscope with the other students they soon found that every one was exactly the same.

    moral of the story: there are things we all want to believe true in ourself. some can recognize these and take advantage of them.
  7. Aug 4, 2003 #6
    Crossing Over..

    I've seen crossing over many times and I'm not so sure John Edwards isn't the real thing. I've seen several episodes where he'll tell an audience member something, and they'll flat out deny it 10 times in a row, then finally the idiot will say: "OH!, you mean my dead mother!' or something to that effect. Of course we'd have to assume they weren't being paid to act stupid.
    Just like the previous post: I've seen a show on TV where they had several skeptics go to the same (actor) psychic and the pyschic told them all the same stuff, and they were amazed.
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2003
  8. Aug 4, 2003 #7
    Re: Clairvoyancy

    There is where I would concentrate my attention. Was there anything spoken that she couldn't possibly have guessed at?

    The television shows make me suspect they are staged. To don the hat of a skeptic, even if the reader were a complete idiot, there is probably some time to learn about the audience before filming. If you went out of the blue to a person who had no time to research you and they began telling you details, not generalities, about things they couldn't possibly know then even the skeptic's eyebrow would likely raise.

    I'd think real hard about what exactly was said, then perhaps pack away a small recorder and hit some more places like that. There is nothing wrong with a little experimenting.
  9. Aug 4, 2003 #8
    Maybe by going around experimenting you would collapse the psychic's wave function and their powers would temporarily stop working.
  10. Aug 4, 2003 #9
    A typical tactic is to plant people in the audience who pre-
    tend to be there to talk to some-
    one on the other side. These
    plants get the people around them
    into conversations and find out
    who they want to contact and some
    of the circumstances of their

    This info is picked up by a trans-
    mitter in the plant's purse, say,
    and goes to the control booth
    where it is collated and fed to
    the "psychic" as needed. This is
    an old, and tried and true scam.

  11. Aug 4, 2003 #10
    Or what if like the relation to vampires and mirrors you cannot capture their voices on audio tape?
  12. Aug 4, 2003 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Re: Re: Clairvoyancy

    well, she did name my persistence in being determined, willful and stubborn, said i had more focus then most in my career...she also had known that i had two previous relationships before...

    my point to this is, you really can't be as objective of it as possible until you had a reading yourself
  13. Aug 4, 2003 #12
    The first part would not be as meaningful to me as the second part, but I’d still look to see if there is any statistical reason why she may have said that.

    No doubt, and that’s why I would take a recorder and visit a number of different readers to compare notes. What Zoobyshoe said…
    …Is something I have experienced on occasion during my life. I don’t know if I’d call it telepathic, but absolutely out of the blue and immediately following a serious injury or illness a relative (including one I hadn’t heard from in years) would come to my house or reach me by telephone claiming they had had a bad feeling I was hurt or in trouble and wanted to check on me.

    Talk about truth being stranger than fiction…

    In a profound way that I will never forget, this happened on two different occasions by two different relatives. One of them demanded to inspect my person, not believing me when I had lied by claiming to be ok. They were even more shocked than I after having their suspicions confirmed. The other couple of times I completely deceived those involved, and I feel rather guilty about that now because I think it may have done them good to have had some positive reinforcement rather than be fed a lie. I mention all of this because of what you said about objectivity and the need for having a reading yourself. There is nothing like experiencing something first hand.

    Because of the details of these happenings and the fact that they happened to me personally on several occasions, I can’t just write them off as coincidence because they were definitely more spectacular than that. Instead, I accept them as some of life’s unexplainables. It was what you might say, freaky, unnerving too. Nothing like that has happened to me in years, but then those involved (other than me) have long since passed away.
  14. Aug 4, 2003 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Re: Re: Clairvoyancy

    I tend to mostly agree with Russ and others. Though without the showmanship, I could duplicate at least some of what Edwards does. I have watched Edwards for many hours to discern the truly striking "hits" and their number, as opposed to the misses. [I also study his techniques for deception.] His record is pretty lousy. His techniques are classic; you work from the specific to the general. For example: I feel something coming from this side of the audience. I am feeling a father figure who has passed in a violent death...I am feeling a head injury. Am I here? Your father is passed? Oh, your uncle...this is a father figure. Did he die from a blow to the head? Oh an aneurism. OK. I'm with you. Whenever it is a thing with the head they show me my childhood teddy bear whose head was cut off.

    I have watched him claim dozens of successes with scenarios just like this one. We start with specific information; then we seek generalities that support the specific and false statements made. But the audience thinks that he has actually done something.

    Edit #2: And here is my favorite part: John can tell you that your mother wants you to forgive yourself for not being more understanding about her problems...BUT EDWARDS CAN ONLY GUESS AT THE LETTERS OF HER NAME! "I am getting a mother figure whose name begins with an S". Please...People! This should be all that you need to see.

    However, I think some psychics are real. I don't know if this ability can be controlled or called upon demand. I tend to doubt that any famed psychic is genuine. One problem with this theory is the case of Jean Dixon. Her public fame skyrocketed when she publicly warned and begged John F. Kennedy not to go to Dallas. She told him that he would be assassinated.

    Edit: The Amazing Randi is no more credible than John Edwards. James wouldn't believe in Mack trucks even if he was run over by one. I have seen him dismiss what clearly qualifies as significant. He is a true disbeliever...no more credible than the true believers.
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2003
  15. Aug 4, 2003 #14
    That's a good one, alright.
    Why is it that the spirits are right there talking to him, wanting him to pass along specific information to specific individuals, but they don’t seem to tell him the names of the people to pass the good tidings along to; “Is there a someone with in the audience with name like Charles, or Charlie, or Charlene, or something that starts with a CH sound, blah blah blah.”
    Then on the ‘live’ end he still has to work backwards in order to figure out the name of the spirit he’s in contact with as well, haha.
  16. Aug 4, 2003 #15

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Clairvoyancy

    Isn't the Hawthorne district cool!
  17. Aug 4, 2003 #16
    Why does everyone here live in Oregon?
  18. Aug 4, 2003 #17


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Re: Clairvoyancy

    You guys have it all wrong - they don't stage these things. They don't need to. Psychics are simply gifted frauds. I had heard rumors that he had some sort of cocktail hour before the show with bugs in the room so he could fish for stories, but I don't even think thats necessary. The people who they have on that show very badly want to hear what they hear.
  19. Aug 4, 2003 #18
    I should have said rigged. I don't really think the audience is in on it as much as think they are being conned.
  20. Aug 5, 2003 #19
    "Network" a good movie. Real is there, but you must look for it inside yourself. You have to punch a hole in the dam before the water begins to flow. In the movie, he did not go mad, his anger brought him into absolute clarity.
  21. Aug 5, 2003 #20

    You said:

    " The Amazing Randi is no more credible than John Edwards. James wouldn't believe in Mack trucks even if he was run over by one."

    I can't believe you are being
    suckered in by the Mack Truck
    hoaxers. Granted a certain small
    percentage of them may be authen-
    tic, but it is common knowledge
    that the overwhelming majority
    of them are assembled piece by
    piece by human beings behind closed doors somewhere in Michigan.

    To the extent the Amazing Randi's work pushes the fence sit-
    ters onto the side of realistic
    thinking he is doing a good thing.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook