Is John Edward's 'Crossing Over' a Hoax?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phobos
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around skepticism towards John Edward and his show "Crossing Over," highlighting concerns about his methods and the ethics of profiting from people's grief. Participants criticize Edward's apparent use of "cold reading" techniques, where he makes generalized statements that can apply to many individuals, leading to accusations of him being a fraud. Some express outrage at the exploitation of vulnerable audiences, suggesting that his show preys on those mourning lost loved ones. The conversation also touches on the broader acceptance of mysticism in society, with some arguing that this trend poses risks, particularly when it intersects with issues like medical treatment and education. Others defend the notion that belief in such phenomena is a natural human instinct, while emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and skepticism. The debate reflects a clash between belief in psychic abilities and a demand for accountability in the entertainment industry, with calls for greater awareness of the potential harm caused by figures like Edward.
  • #31
Wow! Wahoo really got your dander up, eh?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Originally posted by looneytunes
Wow! Wahoo really got your dander up, eh?


Don't want to live on planet of the Jerry Springer apes. I must be really persnickety... ;\
 
  • #33
Can anyone say NETWORK. Great movie, we seem to be living in that time. Truth is real, but it for the most part it is not manipulatable. It's relativity adjusts itself by the total sum of all the forces. One may witness the dead in this life time, but I have great doubts that even one who is close to the most final of stages can get such selective answers in such tones. One does not control truth or any power. One is subjected to it. If you try to profiet from truth, it will run from you. If you get high on it, it will also run from you. If you sacafice for it and for the nobelest of reasons, then experience will be upon you. Truth can't be bought, it is paid for in sweat and blood.
 
  • #34
It seems to me that nobody understands exactly what Mr. Edwards is. DID YOU KNOW although our aforementioned Mr. Edwards claims to be able to transcend into the other world with, after watching the show, quite a good hit rate. However, it is a fact that it takes 6 hours to produce one of those 24 minute episodes because of his "hit rate."

Also, John Edwards is an expert in Statistics (I think he got a degree somewhere along the line and he's pretty good at it!).

Come on now. simply speaking, all he is doing is a game of random mathematics. He may have a certain amount of insight BUT most of his predictions are pure mathematics. All he does is works out the odds of certain things happening and then he comes up with his supposed transcendental uh..thing.

One must applaud him for his entrepreneurial (okay that word is spelt wrong - SORRY) skills although i really don't like him.
 
  • #35
Originally posted by Shahil
It seems to me that nobody understands exactly what Mr. Edwards is. DID YOU KNOW although our aforementioned Mr. Edwards claims to be able to transcend into the other world with, after watching the show, quite a good hit rate. However, it is a fact that it takes 6 hours to produce one of those 24 minute episodes because of his "hit rate."

Also, John Edwards is an expert in Statistics (I think he got a degree somewhere along the line and he's pretty good at it!).

Come on now. simply speaking, all he is doing is a game of random mathematics. He may have a certain amount of insight BUT most of his predictions are pure mathematics. All he does is works out the odds of certain things happening and then he comes up with his supposed transcendental uh..thing.

One must applaud him for his entrepreneurial (okay that word is spelt wrong - SORRY) skills although i really don't like him.

But this is capitalism, isn't it? We all love capitalism so much yet we get bent out of shape when someone practices it. Yeah, he's taking advantage of slow heads, but that's why they say, "caveat emptor". It's your own look out if you happen to be one of the rank and file simple folk who get taken in by all the crap that is on 99% of telly. Maybe this is the only way a human society can ever get on; the rank and file galoots do the labour and carry the spears so that the rest can devote our time to other things.
 
  • #36
How many of you critics have actually been to one of John Edward's shows? How many of you have been read by Mr. Edward? Seriously people, you think that because someone who makes his living off of being SKEPTICAL is going to be honest all the time. No. He's going to be sketpcial of anything that the masses of America feel uncertain about. Why? Because that's how he keeps his job. You're all accusing John Edward of being some capitalist, money mongerer. Take a look at where your information is coming from, people who make money from pointing fingers and saying "Oh, he's a fraud, that can't be possible. I'm close minded and just want to keep my job. I can't seem weak even though there is definite scientific evidance that John Edward is real." Open your eyes people. John Edward is real. HBO did a documentary on it. Gary E. Schwartz has done scientific experiments that PROOVE he is real, that he can provide the data in a laboratory setting.
 
  • #37
Who would know the difference? Who would check the checker? When a human being interacts with the universe in this way, the frequency is not this often and you just don't rip these things out of the air for everybody. I cannot say with certainty that his experiences are real or made for TV. I do not know. I do know that it does exist, but to prove that is the key. Proving does not give witness to anyone, but will always leave them with a question of beyond a shadow of a doubt. None of the skeptics ever realize this.

For me, I am a witness to the future. I have spoken these things in certainty before they happened. That which did happen was beyond my control in all cases. I am looking for a way to present this to a reputable college or possibly write a book. If people acknowleged a greater portion of reality, it would alter the course of some human action in accordance with the understanding. How much, who knows, but it would happen to some degree.
 
  • #38
Originally posted by Klicks
John Edward is real. HBO did a documentary on it. Gary E. Schwartz has done scientific experiments that PROOVE he is real, that he can provide the data in a laboratory setting.
I'd really like to see that info, because what I've seen shows quite the opposite.

In fact, though I gave him credit for being good at what he does (cold reading), according to this article, his actual hit rate isn't all that impressive at 10-20%.

http://www.skeptic.com/newsworthy13.html

The video clips I was shown makes it obvious why Edward does not want raw footage going out to the public--he's not all that good at doing cold readings. Where I estimated Van Praagh's hit rate at between 20-30 percent, Edward's hit rate at between 10-20 percent (the error-range in the estimates is created by the fuzziness of what constitutes a "hit"--more on this in a moment). The advantage Edward has over Van Praagh is his verbal alacrity. Van Praagh is Ferrari fast, but Edward is driving an Indy-500 racer. In the opening minute of the first reading captured on film by the ABC camera, I counted over one statement per second (ABC was allowed to film in the control room under the guise of filming the hardworking staff, and instead filmed Edward on the monitor in the raw). Think about that--in one minute Edward riffles through 60 names, dates, colors, diseases, conditions, situations, relatives, and the like. It goes so fast that you have to stop tape, rewind, and go back to catch them all. When he does come up for air the studio audience members to whom he is speaking look like deer in the headlights. In the edited tape provided by Edward we caught a number of editing mistakes, where he appears to be starting a reading on someone but makes reference to something they said "earlier." Oops!
It does however affirm what I said earlier about John Edwards not helping anyone despite how they feel when they leave the show:
The reason John Edward, James Van Praagh, and the other so-called mediums are unethical and dangerous is that they are not helping anyone in what they are doing. They are simply preying on the emotions of grieving people. As all loss, death, and grief counselors know, the best way to deal with death is to face it head on. Death is a part of life, and pretending that the dead are gathering in a television studio in New York to talk twaddle with a former ballroom-dance instructor is an insult to the intelligence and humanity of the living.
 
Last edited:
  • #39
Head down to your local library and pick up "The Afterlife Experiments" by Gary E. Schwartz. I'm not sure where you can get a hold of the HBO documentary, it is entitled "Life Afterlife."
 
  • #40
Originally posted by Klicks
Head down to your local library and pick up "The Afterlife Experiments" by Gary E. Schwartz. I'm not sure where you can get a hold of the HBO documentary, it is entitled "Life Afterlife."
After reading http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-01/medium.html , no - I don't think I will. (they also have a number of articles on Edwards himself)
Professor Gary Schwartz makes revolutionary claims that he has provided competent scientific evidence for survival of consciousness and--even more extraordinary--that mediums can actually communicate with the dead. He is badly mistaken. The research he presents is flawed, and in numerous ways. Probably no other extended program in psychical research deviates so much from accepted norms of scientific methodology as this one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #42
Originally posted by Klicks
And here is a critique of your critique:

http://www.enformy.com/Gary-reHymanReview.htm
"I do not have control over my beliefs."
That quote from your link (the basis for his response) does not appear in the critique. Also, your link isn't another critique, its a response by the scientist who conducted the study - hardly an unbiased opinion on the validity of the critique. The opinion of someone not connected to the study might be more compelling. Has anyone of scientific merit published a positive critique?

Anyway, I'm really not interested in going further with this. I didn't find the response very compelling - in fact, it was exactly what I expected after reading the critique.
 
Last edited:
  • #43
completetly irrelevant...

Ok, well you know how recently in the US deomcratic primary there's a john edwards? (well, if you didn't know, now you do) well i was at work, (i clean rooms at a hotel) and i there was a lot press people there covering the 1st primary, which is held in hew hampshire, home sweet home. And i couldn't help resisting all the paper work they had on candidates, and i realized that they all had itinerary schedules. I was like woah cool, maybe i can go check out some cadidates, even though I'm not of legal age... so i looked through them and saw that edwards was going to be in town.

bit later that day i was like
--"hey lynn, (another house maid, who I've been friends with a while, who is a drop out, and is pregnant at 18 and just basically just not like wicked smart, but she's a sweetheart.) john edwards is having a rally at the bowling alley tonight, you doing anything? i think i want to go."
--and she's like "woah really? omg, so cool."
--and I'm all like woah... cool? hmm "lynn do you know who he is?"
--and she's like "duh, i aint that dumb, I've always wanted to meet him and stuff, I've seen him on tv and whatnot. I've always like, and this'll sound dumb, but i never was sure if he was real." and I'm like... uhh... ook... she continues "i want to go with you that'd be soo cool. I want to go up to him and ask him if he's real"
--and I'm like heh... ook "why don't you think he's real?"
--she says "well i see him on tv all the time and stuff."
--so I'm like huh "well i haven't seen many of his adds, mostly dean and kerry's and s few leiberman's...neat. kinda cool that we could meet someone who'll be president... i guess that kinda is unreal.."
--and she's like "huh? yeah, i watch his show all the time! my mum'll be so jealous"
--me: "uuuh.. what?!? he has a show... damn.. how could i have missed that?"
--lynn's like "you know, that show... crossing.. crossing over or something?"
-at which point i nearly wet myself in laughter because she was talking about that john edwards... she just looked at me funny for a while and was like...
--"am i thinking of the wrong guy?"

...oh man, it was funny... guess you had to be there...
 
  • #44
Welcome back Gale17. :smile:
 
  • #45
gah, I'm not back... I'm just taking a sabbatical from my vacation...
 
  • #46
Originally posted by Klicks
How many of you critics have actually been to one of John Edward's shows? How many of you have been read by Mr. Edward? Seriously people, you think that because someone who makes his living off of being SKEPTICAL is going to be honest all the time. No. He's going to be sketpcial of anything that the masses of America feel uncertain about. Why? Because that's how he keeps his job. You're all accusing John Edward of being some capitalist, money mongerer. Take a look at where your information is coming from, people who make money from pointing fingers and saying "Oh, he's a fraud, that can't be possible. I'm close minded and just want to keep my job. I can't seem weak even though there is definite scientific evidance that John Edward is real." Open your eyes people. John Edward is real. HBO did a documentary on it. Gary E. Schwartz has done scientific experiments that PROOVE he is real, that he can provide the data in a laboratory setting.


"HBO did a documentary on it". Lol! Is this Homer Simpson?
 
  • #47
Hmm i think John Edward has a degree in Public Administration or something...whats that?
 
  • #48
i tend to keep an open mind on things like this and if you think that I am just another lame-brained bozo then f**k you and your bigoted opinions. Why are you having a go at Klicks? isn't he entitled to his own opinion. Spiritualism is like a religion, spiritualists and psychics believe in God, and you are insulting someone (John Edward) because he may believe in what he does and other people may believe in what he does.

Im sure you would get all uppity if i said that Christians and Muslims and anyone who believes in something are stupid and what they do is all a sham, and they enjoy trying to exploit people to join their 'religion'. Allow people to freely express their opinion without belittling them. You're just a bunch of animals. I hope you are ashamed.
 
  • #49
The true colours of a "spiritual" person.
 
  • #50
Aren't we high and mighty?
 
  • #51
thus proving my point. I am not a spiritualist, however i am a moral and open minded person who doesn't put down every idea just cos they don't agree with it.
 
  • #52
Originally posted by jimmy p
i tend to keep an open mind on things like this and if you think that I am just another lame-brained bozo then f**k you and your bigoted opinions. Why are you having a go at Klicks? isn't he entitled to his own opinion. Spiritualism is like a religion, spiritualists and psychics believe in God, and you are insulting someone (John Edward) because he may believe in what he does and other people may believe [bold added]
Your attitude aside, "debunking" is the word you are looking for. We're not attacking Klicks, we're trying to help him/her to see what John Edwards is: a fraud. Though its possible that John Edwards actually believes he has that power, the evidence I have seen suggests he is a purposeful fraud: he absolutely has to know that his show is dishonest at the very least with its editing.

Interestingly, the writer of the critique I posted was at one time a professional palm reader. But being scientifically minded, he responded to a challenge by a professor of his in college, found out he was wrong, and has since devoted his life to understanding the phenomenon: understanding why people believe this stuff and trying to help them.

Strong believers in this sort of thing(not the casual believer in astrology for example) are sick and need help. Not surprisingly, the strongest of the believers are those who just recently lost a loved-one and are in need of help in dealing with it.

And hey - welcome back Gale.
 
Last edited:
  • #53
OK i suppose i have been a little bit oppressive but my mums side of the family are spiritualists. My dads side think it is nonsense but i keep and open mind.

I don't think half my family are sick and need help - the last family member on that side to die passed away back in 1991 so its not like they mourn a recent loss.

anyway, what do you mean "your attitude aside?"
 
  • #54
If he is an honest man and believes what he’s doing, he’s saying he hears voices in his head. But then he goes on and says things such as “I’m getting a feeling” or “I feel some pain in my chest”, which I’d like to point out if you ever see a person in pain, you start to image what their pain must feel like. Now wouldn’t you agree with me, if he really was communicating with a dead person, their pain, and their consciousness would cease to feel any pain? Even if he goes on to say you’re father or mother are proud of you, there is no actual communication, only attempts to prove that he knows what the dead person was once feeling. Maybe he should say the dead person says hello, and wants you to know that last night when you asked a personal question, (without actually voicing it) the answer is yes.

Strange world we live in!
 
  • #55
I doubt he 'feels' the pain but maybe he feels something about that person... I am not sure, my mums family are the typical mediterranean type, you know, really emotional and such-like. I am not sure, maybe 'psychics are really emotional people, so much that they 'feel' the pain of dead people, i dunno.
 

Similar threads

The Limits of Knowledge: Is John Edward Real?
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
8K
John Edwards a fake or the real deal?
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
61K
Is the Anti-Nuke Movement's Most Popular Leader a Danger to Public Safety?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
8 Traits Successful People Have In Common" with Richard St John
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Meet a Mentor: Mark44 - Get to Know Your Wonderful Mentors
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
The Scientist as Hero - or not
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Richard Dawkins and James Randi about Bleep
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
News Why is Fox News so chaotic and unorganized?
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
Which Chooses Fate: The Lady or the Tiger?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
Death, Nothingness and Subjectivity
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K