This chick would have gotten away with it if she had been less greedy.  Lots of psychics and tarot readers are basically “loss leaders” who try to get people dependant on them.  Then they start milking their clients with rituals and bogus voodoo.

One common scam is the “cursed money”.  They’ll find out that you got a $413 tax refund, for example.  They’ll start playing up bad things which have happenned to you, tell you about your negative chakra balance, whatever.  Eventually they’ll “discover” that the $413 was cursed.  They’ll offer to bury it at midnight using a ritual which will remove the curse.  Just bring them $413 plus $200 for the ritual.  Needless to say, the money never gets buried.

Hit someone up for $500, say twice a year, and she’ll keep coming back (for whatever reason, the victims are almost universally female).  $50,000 all at once.. Well, I admire the chutzpah, but you’re pretty likely to get caught.

Lots of psychics and tarot readers are basically “loss leaders” who try to get people dependant on them. Then they start milking their clients with rituals and bogus voodoo.

Hey now.. not all tarot readers are the same… being a tarot reader myself… not professionally nor could I ever charge for it.. we are not all and the majority of us “true” readers are not greedy money grabbers. A majority of other readers I know are against those who charge for such a thing.

Sure it is nice to receive compensation in return for offering assistance - for me personally a cookie or a sandwich is nice due to the fact the more readings I do the hungrier I get. But it is not expected or necessary. Readers like myself use the cards as guidance and know that the outcome is changeable for “they"(the cards) only tell for the current path one is on.

Just like all things it takes one spoiled apple to ruin the appeal of the rest. A “true” guider will not ask for a set amount of compensation in my opinion.( Sure there is a donation which isn’t always necessary but a nice way to compensate someone for their effort.) I personally do several readings a day. On top of it I do wheel of the year guidance charts which can take a while to do.  And don’t get one dime for any of them. Nor do I really care one way or another if I get compensation I do it to help others.

Now I am just rambling.. but a “true” reader will not prey on others.

Hawq, I’ll preface this by saying that I’m definitely a skeptic when it comes to ESP, Tarot Card readings and just about anything supernatural. I’ve yet to see any data from any studies that would suggest that fortune telling of any kind actually works.

That said, if people want to have some fun with a deck of Tarot Cards or reading their daily horoscopes then I don’t generally have a problem with it. When they set up shop and start charging people huge fees for their services then I get a lot more uppity about it. The statement from Daryl is, I believe, referring to the latter over the former. If you’re doing readings for folks who ask for it and they’re giving you some token of their appreciation for it then that’s certainly OK in my book. When you get to the scale of the “psychic” in the news story I quoted then I think you’re committing fraud.

I encourage folks to be skeptical of things like Tarot Cards and psychics because it can lead to situations like the news story above. Some folks just seem to be susceptible to credulous thinking that just multiplies with each thing they buy into.

I understand what you are saying Les. And I realize that Daryl was speaking about those whom take advantadge, but it is one of those things close to home which hit a soft spot. Just had to make sure the oither perspective was seen (one of many pespectives)

I don’t consider tarot cards as a form of ESP. But at the same time many take then as was to see the “future”. Personally they are just a tool that gives a focal point when trying to figure out a problem. Yes the card individally has their meaning but for the most part everything they mean depends on what is inside. I use to think they were a crock of shit. Till I stopped listening to what I was made to beleive and start thinking for myself. So I picked some up and “investigated” them.

So I am a try-it-at-least-once girl.

Hey, I’m with you on the try it once thing. There was a time in my youth when I believed in a lot of this stuff including ESP and UFOs and Ghosts and what have you. In fact I was so taken with some of the ideas that I read up on them quite a bit. My personal library is full of books on hauntings and pyramid power and so on. I’ve had my palms read, I’ve played with Ouiji boards, and I’ve hunted ghosts, tried my hand at telepathy, and done the tarot thing and so forth. I was even engaged to a practicing Wiccan for awhile.

Between my experiences and the studying I’ve done on the subject I ended up becoming the skeptic about such things that I am today. I know folks who swear by their daily horoscope, I have friends who can’t go a day without doing a tarot reading, I’ve heard from hundreds of people who will swear on their mother’s grave that they’ve had experiences that can’t be explained away and I believe all of these people are sincere in their belief, but every time anyone tries to do a study of whatever phenomena it fails to hold up under scrutiny.

Unfortunately the common reaction from most folks who believe in this stuff is to blame science for the failure rather than whatever phenomena is being tested. For some people it almost seems like they have a need to believe in whatever their particular thing happens to be regardless of what the truth may or may not be for fear that there’s no reason to have hope if it turns out to be false. Excuses can range from claiming the study itself is flawed, which is certainly a possibility, to the presence of “negative energy” from the skeptics that are present, which is hardly a reasonable claim.

Former magician and professional skeptic James Randi has had a standing offer of $1 million to anyone who can prove the existence of any paranormal phenomena in a double-blind test that both parties agree to ahead of time. That is to say that the person applying for the award is involved with the design of the testing process and agrees to it so he won’t have any reason to object if it should not turn out in his or her favor. Randi has accepted applicants for just about everything from homeopathy to dowsing and no one has walked away with the prize yet.

Guess who they blame?

Anyway, I’ve rambled on more about this than I intended to. In part because it’s a sore spot for me as well. There are a lot of scams and frauds that folks could avoid if they just applied some critical thinking to some of the stuff they’re asked to believe and buy into. Can science explain everything? Of course not. If it could then they could shut down all the science departments as there wouldn’t be anything left to discover. One of the purposes of science is to find the facts behind things we don’t currently understand. Critical thinking is unpopular, though, and “skeptic” is practically a four letter word in our society. I point to Halle Berry’s new movie Gothika as a perfect example of this message being reinforced through popular media.

Les, I’m curious…

“. . .to the presence of “negative energy” from the skeptics that are present, which is hardly a reasonable claim. “

Why is that an unreasonable claim?

”For some people it almost seems like they have a need to believe in whatever their particular thing happens to be regardless of what the truth may or may not be for fear that there’s no reason to have hope if it turns out to be false. “

You mean like scientific data?

Some of the most articlate posts I have ever read have come from you, and you tend to make me think of things that had never before occurred to me, and so I’m picking your brain.

The way I see it is this: we occupy a microscopic dot in the universe, and because we have figured out how a small fraction of it works, we think we have progressed enough in our science to figure out the rest of it - when in all actuality, most of the Universe is beyond our reach. Let’s narrow this down to only those who use Tarot cards for genuine spiritual guidance, and readers who read only with genuine heart. In this context if we think of all things spiritual as something that extends the whole universe, then how could we possibly know how to even begin testing it?

I sure hope you understand what I am getting at because I think I busted a blood vessel trying to express it.

Why is that an unreasonable claim?

That’s a good question and there are several answers. The first being the fact that some of the tests have been done by people who were not skeptics and didn’t necessarily expect the test to fail. The second being that no one seems to be able to define exactly what “negative” energy supposedly is, just that it’s something emitted by skeptics. Third, it doesn’t seem to be affected by distance as some have claimed that a single skeptic in the same room would screw up the experiment and others have claimed that simply a skeptic being aware of the test anywhere in the world would be enough to screw up the test. If that’s true then that would make skeptics some of the most powerful psychics ever.

Fourth, and most important, when the time comes to administer the agreed upon tests that Randi has set up, before they do the actual test the person making the claim is allowed to demonstrate his ability whatever it may be (dowsing or reading while blindfolded or what have you) in whatever way they normally do. Every single time it works as advertised. Then they administer the double blind test and every single time it fails. You would think that Randi’s presence during the initial demonstration would be enough to screw up that as well as the test itself, but it only seems to affect the test.

You mean like scientific data?

Touché! The implication being, of course, that science has been wrong before. Science and scientific data are just tools for trying to determine the facts about reality. Like any tools they can be misused and produce incorrect conclusions especially if the scientist is prejudiced on what the outcome should be.

A good scientist bases his conclusions on what the data presents and he retests the experiment several times to ensure it turns out the same way every time. He then publishes his data for peer review and several of his fellow scientists who are working in the same field attempt to recreate the experiment on their own to verify whether or not it does, indeed, seem to produce the data it’s claimed to. If it does then the theory is upheld and further experiments based on it are carried out. If it doesn’t then the good scientists will abandon it. Those folks who end up clinging to bad data because it verifies something they want to be true are practicing bad science. This is part of why how any given test or experiment is done is vitally important. A poorly designed experiment will produce some poor data.

So, are there scientists who cling to bad data regardless of what the truth might be? Absolutely. Which is why we have peer review in the first place.

Some of the most articlate posts I have ever read have come from you, and you tend to make me think of things that had never before occurred to me, and so I’m picking your brain.

Thank you, I’m very flattered. In all honesty, that’s the real reason I maintain this site is to get folks to think a little about stuff. You just made my day.

The way I see it is this: we occupy a microscopic dot in the universe, and because we have figured out how a small fraction of it works, we think we have progressed enough in our science to figure out the rest of it - when in all actuality, most of the Universe is beyond our reach. Let’s narrow this down to only those who use Tarot cards for genuine spiritual guidance, and readers who read only with genuine heart. In this context if we think of all things spiritual as something that extends the whole universe, then how could we possibly know how to even begin testing it?

This is going to be lengthy so bear with me here.

Because if it extends to the whole of the universe then that means some of it at least has to be here and if it’s here then it should be testable the same as gravity is. Gravity, too, seems to extend throughout the whole of the universe and we can test it regularly by simply dropping a ball. Yet I don’t see anyone debating the existence of gravity or saying that we can’t possibly test it because it extends through the whole of the Universe. If there is some real force or phenomena that make reading tarot cards produce anything that reflects reality then it should be possible to test it.

Is it possible for science to figure out how everything in the Universe works? That’s debated even among scientists. Some think we can and some don’t. I don’t think there are many scientists with the hubris to believe we’ve figured out how most of things work.

Did you know that we don’t have a clue how gravity works? We have some theories, but we haven’t proven any of them to any great degree yet. We know enough about its effect that we have all sorts of good mathematical formulas for making predictions about how it’ll affect a given thing such as the arch of an artillery shell fired at a distant target, but we don’t know how exactly gravity pulls one object to another. However, most folks seem to accept what science has to say about gravity without giving it a second thought. Why is that?

Because we can all see its effect on everything around us and seeing is believing for a lot of people.

That’s an important point which is why I set it out there on its own. Nobody disputes the existence of gravity because we can all see how it affects the world around us. The fact that science can’t explain how it works is irrelevant to most folk’s acceptance of it. The fact that science can make predictions about it and those predictions hold up in day to day use only reinforces the acceptance.

Now let us consider Tarot Cards in the same context. If there is some force or a phenomenon out there that allows someone using Tarot Cards to glean some information about possible future events, most folks can’t see its effect on things around them in day to day life as they can with gravity. Hence, most folks don’t put much stock into it. Those that do probably do so because they believe they have seen evidence that it works. Seeing is believing, again. In that way, the believers have “data” that they believe supports their conclusion. If they have data then it should be testable. When tested this data hasn’t held up under scrutiny and the common reaction is to claim that “science can’t know everything.”

The reason folks blame science when it fails to uphold something they believe in is psychological in nature. A lot of the things people believe in are things that bring a sense of comfort or control. One of the common sources of stress for most people is questions about the future. Will I lose my job during the next round of layoffs? Will little Timmy recover from his bout with pneumonia? Where will I find the money to meet all my bills? The sort of worries that we often feel we have no control over and don’t know what the outcome will be. Even if we have no control over it if we at least knew what the outcome was ahead of time we could more easily deal with it emotionally. Tarot readings seem to provide the answers to these questions and end up being a form of comfort in much the same way that people “talking to the dead” or even belief in god provides a form of comfort. When science says there’s no evidence that tarot readings provide any insight into the future it’s essentially attacking a belief that brings comfort to those who take stock in it. If tarot really doesn’t work then how will they find the answers to the questions that cause them the most stress? Rather than give up that sense of comfort many folks will just reject what the findings are saying and take stock in the idea that the forces involved are “beyond the comprehension of science!” By comparison the idea of gravity is not a matter that brings comfort or the lack of it to most people so what science has to say about gravity is rarely challenged by the average person.

Money sponge?! What a great idea.  Wish I thought of that.

But as a believer, I couldn’t use it.  I think there’s a special place in hell for those who hustle people by taking advantage of their spiritual inclinations.

Les, I appreciate the time and thought you put into your response. I can see your point in a lot of what you said. I am going to pick your brain some more.

“ The second being that no one seems to be able to define exactly what “negative” energy supposedly is, just that it’s something emitted by skeptics. “

This is interesting, given what you said about gravity. I may be missing the point or blending too many ideas, so be patient with me. You said nobody disputes gravity “ because we can all see its effect on everything around us. “ It seems to me, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, we see the effects of negative energy around us every day. It is in our body language, our actions and reactions, and while this might not be exactly the kind of negative energy you are pointing to in those tests, I think it all might be generated from the same place - a dysfunctional ego. I think if our minds are acting as some sort of antennae for a force or phenomenon, then of course our minds would have some influence on the tests themselves.
Beyond that, has there never been a test to suggest psychic phenomenon is real? Perhaps they have been “ disproved “ by others, but I can be a little skeptical about that too. I think I would have to be far more knowledgeable about science to understand which tests hold more weight, because certainly the facts as they are believed by the majority aren’t necessarily more credible.

“ Science and scientific data are just tools for trying to determine the facts about reality. Like any tools they can be misused and produce incorrect conclusions especially if the scientist is prejudiced on what the outcome should be “

Just like Tarot readers and cards. I have known two women that could read tarot cards as if they were some window into the future - able to pick out amazing details that sure enough bare true. But if you asked either one of them to test their skills, they would not do it. Why? I don’t know, but I would feel comfortable assuming there is some sacredness to the act for them - whether religious or not. One of those women helped government officials - on more than one occasion - locate a missing child. We don’t hear much about those cases though, because very few want to publicly admit they worked with “ a psychic.” Those readers are rare, or at least, I have not met many. But I do know another whose readings provide assistance to the critical thinking skills you mentioned in another post. Sometimes, some of us need signposts to see the obvious. And this is where I come in. I read runes, which are different, but can be used for divinatory purposes. I rarely ask for an actual glimpse into the future, but for some insight on what’s going on. Time and time again, people have walked away with new perspectives on their issue, which works for them. Maybe I am using no more than a tool to prompt my own intuition or critical thinking to help them, but if so, that’s okay with me. For me personally, if believing there is some higher spiritual connection to it all provides me with comfort - but is no more than a psychological trick I play on myself - I am okay with that too, as long as it is working for me.

You have inspired me to do some research on science and gravity.

“ Because if it extends to the whole of the universe then that means some of it at least has to be here and if it’s here then it should be testable the same as gravity is “

Yep. Hmm. Back to the drawing board. But I am still taking with me the idea that maybe we just haven’t figured out how to test it. If the conventional always worked, then science would never change. Right?

Les, I appreciate the time and thought you put into your response. I can see your point in a lot of what you said. I am going to pick your brain some more.

Not a problem. My answers may get involved, but if you’re willing to read them I’m happy to post them.

“The second being that no one seems to be able to define exactly what “negative” energy supposedly is, just that it’s something emitted by skeptics.”

This is interesting, given what you said about gravity. I may be missing the point or blending too many ideas, so be patient with me. You said nobody disputes gravity “because we can all see its effect on everything around us.” It seems to me, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, we see the effects of negative energy around us every day. It is in our body language, our actions and reactions, and while this might not be exactly the kind of negative energy you are pointing to in those tests, I think it all might be generated from the same place - a dysfunctional ego. I think if our minds are acting as some sort of antennae for a force or phenomenon, then of course our minds would have some influence on the tests themselves.

That’s a pretty big “if,” but if we pretend for the moment that your premise is true then there’s some logic behind the idea that a negative attitude could affect the results of a test. That said you would think that the state of mind of the person attempting the feat, and thereby acting as the primary antennae, would be more important than anyone who is merely witnessing the attempt. Some folks have claimed that Randi merely being aware the test is taking place, even if he’s thousands of miles away, was enough to screw it up because of his negative energy.

There’s also still the question of what constitutes negative energy. Is doubt that something will work negative enough to affect the outcome or does it require outright hostility to the idea of it even being possible? If it only works if you believe it works then how can you know it’s actually working at all?

Getting back to the gravity comparison, there’s no real debate on what effect gravity has on the world around us because anyone can drop some object and see for themselves exactly what gravity does. By comparison you can have two different people do a tarot reading of the same individual and get completely different results. Hell, just compare your horoscope from two different astrologers and see how similar they are.

Beyond that, has there never been a test to suggest psychic phenomenon is real? Perhaps they have been “disproved” by others, but I can be a little skeptical about that too. I think I would have to be far more knowledgeable about science to understand which tests hold more weight, because certainly the facts as they are believed by the majority aren’t necessarily more credible.

Well, the majority (of Americans at least) tend to believe in the paranormal so I agree with your statement about the “facts believed by the majority.” Which brings up an interesting point: If it’s a “fact” then there shouldn’t be any question of believing it. Again turning to gravity for a handy example, it’s a fact that if you let go of a ball held over the ground that it will fall to the ground regardless of whether you believe it will or not. Facts aren’t matters of faith. OK, enough with semantics.

In answer to your question, yes, there have been tests done over the years that seem to indicate that psychic phenomena might possibly exist. ESP as a tool for espionage was a topic of much interest with various U.S. agencies not the least of which was the CIA. Back in 1972 some early tests by Dr. Hal Puthoff, a researcher at SRI, into the possibility of the psychic ability referred to as “remote viewing” attracted the attention of the CIA. The results of Dr. Puthoff’s tests were impressive enough to convince the CIA to fund further research over several years and eventually put the remote viewers to the ultimate test of describing the nuclear test facilities at Semipalatinsk, in the USSR. The CIA studies ran until about 1975 with the final determination from the CIA being that any evidence supporting the idea of remote viewing was questionable at best. That’s when the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense stepped in and picked up where the CIA left off under the program name Project Star Gate and they expanded the program to include all manner of ESP phenomena in addition to remote viewing. This new project continued through the 1980s until it was transferred to the Science Applications International Corporation in 1992. In 1994 SAIC called for the program to be put under review and in 1995 a small panel appointed by American Institutes for Research was assigned the job of doing so. Separate reports by Dr. Jessica Utts and Dr. Ray Hyman conflicted on whether or not there was any evidence to support continuation of the program and as a result funding for the project was terminated after 23 years and some $20 million taxpayer dollars. A bargain, really, considering some of the things the government has wasted money on.

The government kept this program going for so long in part because if there was any chance remote viewing was a real phenomenon it would prove invaluable in the field of espionage. Imagine having people laying down in a small room in Washington, D.C. who are able to describe in detail the layout and activities taking place at any location on the planet. In the face of this enormous potential there was a willingness to overlook some of the problems in the methodology used by the researchers in testing their subjects as well as a tendency to ignore a lot of negative results in favor of a few positive ones. It would take entirely too much space to detail the issues raised with the testing methodology and review of the results that eventually led to the discontinuation of this program, but if you want to learn more you can read Dr. Ray Hyman’s article Evidence for Psychic Functioning: Claims vs. Reality which discusses his role in reviewing the evidence and the issues with methodology.  For the other side of the story you can read Dr. Jessica Utts’ official review of the government project titled An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning.

This is but one example and it’s significant to note that one of the best arguments against ESP in general, and remote viewing in particular, is the simple fact that not even the U.S. government feels there’s enough evidence to bother with it after nearly a quarter century of study. There are still plenty of people who label themselves as remote viewers who claim the government is still making use of their talents, but when pressed to provide evidence they fall back on claims of the programs being top secret as reason why they can’t prove it. Off top of my head I can’t think of a single study done over the years that seemed to indicate the strong possibility of ESP that wasn’t discredited due to flawed methodology.

“Science and scientific data are just tools for trying to determine the facts about reality. Like any tools they can be misused and produce incorrect conclusions especially if the scientist is prejudiced on what the outcome should be”

Just like Tarot readers and cards. I have known two women that could read tarot cards as if they were some window into the future - able to pick out amazing details that sure enough bare true. But if you asked either one of them to test their skills, they would not do it. Why? I don’t know, but I would feel comfortable assuming there is some sacredness to the act for them - whether religious or not. One of those women helped government officials - on more than one occasion - locate a missing child. We don’t hear much about those cases though, because very few want to publicly admit they worked with “a psychic.”

You’ll pardon my skepticism, but without details on what was predicted that came true or which missing child cases they supposedly helped to solve there’s no way to verify their claims. A lot of psychics like to claim they’ve aided in the solving of various crimes including the big names like Sylvia Browne and the news over the years has been filled with stories wherein law enforcement have publicly accepted the help of psychics.

A review by Brill’s Content back in November, 2000 of ten Montel Williams shows which highlighted Sylvia Browne and her claims of solving some 35 crimes found that in 21 of the cases the details were too vague to verify and of the remaining 14 cases “law-enforcement officials or family members involved in the investigations say that Browne had played no useful role.” That hasn’t stopped Sylvia from claiming she aids in cases all the time, though. I suggest checking out the book Psychic Sleuths by Joe Nickell for more info on psychics and their involvement in solving crimes.

Another psychic famous for supposedly helping to solve various crimes is Kathlyn Rhea. Checking her website under the heading “testimonials” you’ll note that she lists a total of four of which only one has a name associated with it. The rest all are credited to “Investigator, District Attorney’s Office” or “Police Sgt., Child Abuse and Sexual Crimes Division” which makes it impossible to verify the testimonials. Though you will learn that she charges a mere $300 for the initial session on any given case.

The point being that a lot of people claim to help solve crimes for the police using all manner of psychic ability, but surprisingly few bother to provide any details on who, where, when, what or how they helped. I’d also like to point out that you’ll find not one single prediction from any psychic about the attacks on the World Trade Center until after the event already happened.

Those readers are rare, or at least, I have not met many. But I do know another whose readings provide assistance to the critical thinking skills you mentioned in another post. Sometimes, some of us need signposts to see the obvious. And this is where I come in. I read runes, which are different, but can be used for divinatory purposes. I rarely ask for an actual glimpse into the future, but for some insight on what’s going on. Time and time again, people have walked away with new perspectives on their issue, which works for them. Maybe I am using no more than a tool to prompt my own intuition or critical thinking to help them, but if so, that’s okay with me. For me personally, if believing there is some higher spiritual connection to it all provides me with comfort - but is no more than a psychological trick I play on myself - I am okay with that too, as long as it is working for me.

I’d argue that someone with good critical thinking skills wouldn’t need the assistance of tarot or rune readings to come to a conclusion about a particular problem or issue. The most widely repeated definition of critical thinking comes from Robert Ennis and is as follows: “Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do. (Cf. Norris and Ennis,1989) Relying on tarot or runes to provide insight is looking externally for the answers rather than relying on one’s ability to think and reason. 

Have you considered the idea that if there is no basis behind the idea of using runes and it is nothing more than a psychological trick you’re playing on yourself that provokes your intuition then it doesn’t really matter if you use runes, tarot or Monopoly cards?

You have inspired me to do some research on science and gravity.

That’s good to hear. A good place to start is to brush up on what the Scientific Method is and how it’s applied.

“Because if it extends to the whole of the universe then that means some of it at least has to be here and if it’s here then it should be testable the same as gravity is”

Yep. Hmm. Back to the drawing board. But I am still taking with me the idea that maybe we just haven’t figured out how to test it. If the conventional always worked, then science would never change. Right?

Testing shouldn’t be as difficult as you seem to imagine, depending on what particular phenomena we’re speaking of. Making predictions about the future, for example, is a simple matter of adding up how many right or wrong answers the person making the predictions ends up with.  If it’s better than what they might have gotten by pure chance then that would support the idea that they may have some predictive powers. That is if you can find record of their predictions after the fact. Repeat several times and if they’re consistent it lends more credence to the claims.

You may want to check out the James Randi Educational Foundation. He tests folks making various paranormal claims on a regular basis as they apply to win the $1 Million Challenge he offers. He’s yet to have a problem coming up with a test for anything presented to him so far.

Maybe I was too vague, or you misread - I just want to point out a couple of things.

I said “ facts as they are believed, “ and meant that even those tend to change after initial claims.

“ I’d argue that someone with good critical thinking skills wouldn’t need the assistance of tarot or rune readings to come to a conclusion about a particular problem or issue. “

Probably. But you might have missed what I said about it.

“ Have you considered the idea that if there is no basis behind the idea of using runes and it is nothing more than a psychological trick you’re playing on yourself that provokes your intuition then it doesn’t really matter if you use runes, tarot or Monopoly cards? “

You might have missed what I said about that too. I referred to my runes as tools - which is the basis - and as a preference over tarot cards, it matters. I referred to spiritual belief as a source of comfort, which even if that was a psychological trick I played on myself to feel comfort - and all that it implies - then that is okay with me.

I do thank you for all the resources. You given me a lot to look at.

Maybe I was too vague, or you misread - I just want to point out a couple of things.

It’s certainly possible I misunderstood you, I am only human.

I said “facts as they are believed,” and meant that even those tend to change after initial claims.

Sometimes that’s true, but you’ll notice that most scientists who are reporting initial findings of a study don’t call their data “facts” but just “data” or “evidence” and they’ll qualify their findings with statements like “seems to support” or “could lead to” rather than making definitive statements. Now that doesn’t stop newspapers from proclaiming these announcements as “facts,” but that’s not necessarily the fault of scientists.

Usually if something is called a fact, the sun rises in the east for example, then there’s usually a good deal of evidence backing that fact up. So, yes, some facts do change as new evidence comes to light, such as the one-time fact that the Earth was the center of the Universe, but overall something has to have a good amount of evidence behind it before science will proclaim it a fact.

Probably. But you might have missed what I said about it.

That’s certainly possible. If you wish to elaborate, feel free.

You might have missed what I said about that too. I referred to my runes as tools - which is the basis - and as a preference over tarot cards, it matters. I referred to spiritual belief as a source of comfort, which even if that was a psychological trick I played on myself to feel comfort - and all that it implies - then that is okay with me.

Ah, I assumed your mentioning of spiritual belief was directly tied to the use of runes. I see now you were making two separate statements.

I’ve always said that if belief in these things helps people to be better persons and brings them some comfort then I don’t have a problem with it. Far be it for me to take away a source of comfort if it’s relatively harmless. I think you’d be better off realizing the truth of your own potential and ability, but if it works for you…

“ . . . the sun rises in the east for example. . . “

. . . is even arguable, especially as it does not rise, it only appears to. I say it simply to illustrate something I have noticed; points sometimes get lost over choice of words. Just an observation.

I’ll pardon your skepticism, as you might pardon my optimism. I have seen too much to disregard the possibilities, as you have probably seen enough to discredit them all.

“ I think you’d be better off realizing the truth of your own potential and ability. . . “

What makes you think I am not, Les?

In this New Testament passage of the Bible ACTS:16 “Once when we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit by which she predicted the future. She earned a great deal of money for her owners by fortune-telling.” You can see that there are such things, but if they have any abilities to do so it comes from demons and ultimately from satan. God may allow things of this nature but abhors it as he does murder, adultery, worship of idols, etc, SIN! I don’t know if any of the present day psycics are possessed or not, but anything of this nature isn’t from God and therefore not for me.

“Former magician and professional skeptic James Randi has had a standing offer of $1 million to anyone who can prove the existence of any paranormal phenomena in a double-blind test that both parties agree to ahead of time. That is to say that the person applying for the award is involved with the design of the testing process and agrees to it so he won’t have any reason to object if it should not turn out in his or her favor. Randi has accepted applicants for just about everything from homeopathy to dowsing and no one has walked away with the prize yet.”

A friend of mine who has some psychic abilities, has applied for the Randy challenge. Once she passed the first roudns of tests, she was not allowed to continue the challenge. They simply refused to let her go on.

I will rather not say what abilities she has, because when I first heard of it, I would not dare believe it. I thought it was the most stupid thing someone every thought of. And in that time I was practicing some abilities myself.

But OK, so that’s that, it seems Randi does not accept people who actually have a chance of getting that $1,000,000 price. Either that or things are left at “unconclusive”.

It’s a nice story, but without knowing your friend’s name or what her supposed power is supposed to be there’s no way to verify that you’re telling us the truth. A lot of people make claims like this against James Randi without providing anything to back those claims up. Not exactly a convincing argument.