Words mean what we agree they mean….

I think if there is a consensus agreement about what a word means then those who use the word should know what they mean and/or be open to question or challenge.

Skeptic, Debunker and Cynic are often used inter-changeably with each other by those who often have an agenda which includes responding defensively to challenges of their claims.

Starting with de-bunker, an ugly word I think, but one that applies to any and all who set out to prove another persons claim to be wrong. The default position is one of incredulity; they are frequently closed minded and often lack the critical thinking faculties to effectively mount anything other than an emotional argument based upon rhetoric.

You will find debunkers of every colour and persuasion. From the paranormal naysayers to the New Age Space Cadet Science Denialists.

There have in common fixed thinking; closed minds and an inability to consider evidence contrary to their own narrow perspective. Some self-professed and even ‘trained’ scientists fall into this category as do the spiritual gurus proclaiming that their truth is the ONLY truth.

So Cynics – well their just cynical. Doubtful and distrusting of any opinion, evidence or experience that is not their own. The closed world of some of the conspiracy theorists is where you will often find these folk…,

We must differentiate between pseudo-cynics (those who think it is cool to be in cold towards any creative, spiritual, artistic, touchy-feely, modern science consideration of experience) and those who real-cynics with a sad, pessimistic and closed outlook on life.

The skeptic (or sceptic) who simply asked questions and seeks out a wide range of possible explanations for what they asked to consider as fact or truth. They may have scientific world view in which evidence requires validation or they may have a humanistic/spiritual outlook which recognises the limits to scientific method but still wants to question what they are being told using critical and creative thinking,

Most sceptics will question evidence for and of the paranormal ….

Most sceptics will ask the same questions of scientific evidence ….

Nor all sceptics are atheists; some are deists; some ‘rational mystics’ since they will choose recognise the importance of non-material subjective experiences.

So before you use the word sceptic rather than cynic or de-dunker check yourself and make sure you know what you ARE saying.

Alan

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Many of you will recall the four part TV special that Derren Brown did on UK TV last year – Derren Brown Investigates.

On the whole I thought the series was good and I did blog about each of the episodes when they aired.

In recent months, and with the cooperation of the mediums involved with Haunted Cornwall FM, I’ve been looking at the question of ‘accuracy’ and ‘relevance’ when it comes to psychic or mediumistic readings. I am grateful to the six individuals who have agreed to take part and respect their willingness to ‘play’ and ‘explore’.

Now whilst this particular ‘test’ is still in the data collation phase, I am in the process of writing up from existing notes the method and protocols used which will be part of the final ‘report’. In the process of checking some references I came across some articles related to Joe Power (the medium who was on the Derren Brown TV Show).

 What I found interesting here are the claims and counter claims as to the “fairness” of the portrayal of Mr Power himself in the programme.

Now, before I take a more detailed look at the claims, it must be said that most of the folks I talked too about this particular show, including mediums and psychics, agreed that Mr Power did himself few favours. For me the post show claims of ‘fairness of test’ is a common theme in most (if not all cases) where psychic ability has been ‘tested’ and found lacking.

It seems to me that some of those folks in the past who have ‘played’ with ‘testing’ and ‘experimentation’ have agreed to the protocols and limtations of the ‘test’ before they did it and when things didn’t go the way they hoped, believed or planned go back on any agreement and look for ways to prove that the ‘test’ or ‘tester’ was at fault.

I guess these complaints would not be forthcoming if the test had validated their claims.

The nature of science and scientific method is, of course, to examine and challenge the methods used in any experiment in order to ensure that the findings are sound. But the post-test reviews by some of the psychics who ‘fail’ the ‘tests’ they agree to are more often than not based upon claims of deciet rather than any meaningful challenge to the methods used.

Let’s take the Joe Power case for example. Joe made an official complaint to Ofcom about  Objective Productions, the producers of Derrens show. Thec complaint was about ‘unfair’ treatement, presentation of ‘material facts’ and editing of the programme (one assumes to make Mr Power ‘look bad’).

As the results of this complaint have now been made public, I feel I can blog about it with relative ‘safety’. (Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin 7th February 2011).

So what was Mr Power’s opinion on the show?

The following is from Joes own blog.

Statement from Joe regarding Derren Brown – Investigates 
You may have watched my recent appearance on “Derren Brown – Investigates” on Monday 10^th May 2010. If you managed to catch it, you will have noted ….all was not as it seems as the well know sceptic, himself might say.

 For example, the production company advertised for a list of readers to use in the documentary. Ultimately they therefore had a free reign as to who they chose for me to read for.  I was not informed who I would be reading for, where I was going or when I was reading.
 
When I arrived at Vanda’s address I immediately informed the Director of the programme, Mr Heenan Bhatti, that my sister lived in the road. The Director’s enquired if I had read for Vanda at the address previously to which I responded I had not. It is disappointing that with creative editing the programme makers have attempted to imply that I gathered information about this lady (and others) through my sister. For the record, this is not true.

I was therefore reluctant to attend the address because I anticipated the programme makers were keen to use this against me and shatter my reputation.

The programme makers were not interested in documenting a fair and balanced portrayal of my act but merely attempted to destroy my reputation that I have built up over many years. With this in mind, I instructed solicitors to write to the programme makers putting them on notice that if any comments broadcast were defamatory, I would reserve my position to issue proceedings.

You will note from the letter dated 26^th March 2009, clear confirmation that I informed Mr Bhatti I was aware of Vanda’s address. There was no mention of this in the programme.

Further evidence of my unfair portrayal was Claire Copper’s reading at the Hollyoaks’ studios. I had no recollection of ever seeing a Mini Cooper parked in the car park as insinuated by “Lee” Derren Brown’s Runner. Lee is/was also employed by Lime Pictures (makers of Hollyoaks). In any event, the car park was dark and no car pulled up next to me. I am aware the programme makers took the CCTV footage from the car park that night and have failed to provide any evidence to support its claim. It is their words against mine. I will leave it for you to decide who you believe.

In my opinion, I believed I would be making an informative and constructive debate into the life of a psychic. It soon became aware that this was not going to happen. I was aware Derren was a celebrity sceptic but did not for one minute believe the programme makers would undertake underhand tactics like changing clients names and their personal details to prohibit a true reading like they did with “Pam”. For those of you who watched the programme, you will note I exposed “this reading” as a set up very early on and was disappointed the programme makers had clearly decided to make a negative documentary about what I do. I did however felt pressured to continue. It is my belief that “Pam” also felt pressured to continue. It was interesting to note both “Pam” and Derren couldn’t remember if they had met earlier. Any reading was always going to be distorted with such variables.

 I do not ask you to believe what I do is true. My gift provides a lot of people throughout the country with a certain amount of comfort and happiness. Like many other psychics and mediums throughout the country, you either believe us or you do not. I am not forcing you to believe me but the programme will have upset a lot of people who do.

It is disappointing that what you saw last night was not actually a realistic interpretation of the week in question and I merely wish for you to be fully informed of the actual facts to make you make your own mind up.

On Joe’s blog there is also a statement from his solicitor:-

Statement from Joe’s Solicitor

In my opinion, having watched the programme, it is disappointing to note Mr Brown and Objective Productions failed in parts to truly reflect the time they spent with Joe. Whilst Joe was aware he was taking part in a programme with the well-known sceptic Derren Brown, he did not expect the programme makers to so comprehensively alter the dynamics and boundaries of the clients he was reading for.

Affecting any variables in all testing is always going to affect the outcome. It was clear from the programme that Joe actually did very well but it is important to point out that despite numerous letters to and from Objective Productions it still chose to imply Joe was “fed” information from his sister, (despite him expressly making the Director of the programme aware of this fact) and that he engaged in “cold reading”.  

I share Joe’s frustration that what could have been an open and informative debate on a fascinating subject area was sacrificed to make dramatic television.

Joe’s fan base speaks for itself and viewers can and will have made up their own mind up.

Joseph Walsh
Solicitor
Brabners Chaffe Street

OK, so there’s the complaint.

I think if you read it carefully you may come up with your own thoughts as to how solid (or not) Joes counter claims are.

The idea that people using ‘false’ names actually made his readings difficult or that such ‘deception’ or ‘under-handed’ techniques make the ‘test’ invalid is patently non-sense. Surely if you are testing clairvoyant abilities then:-

a) The ‘reader’ should not have knowledge of the people they are reading for

b) Experimental controls, which may include the inclusion of blinds and red herrings, could be part and parcel of the protocol for testing. Even a ‘name’ can give hints to an experienced ‘cold reader’ – think about it. Names have generational and sometimes social-class bias. (That’s why the test I am conducting replaces names with numbers).

c) Informing the ‘Director’ that his sister lived in the ‘same’ road as one of the volunteers Joe read for is one thing, admitting is was ‘next door’ (if I recall) is a bit different. Moreover during the reading itself that was filmed Joe could have commented upon the fact so ensuring that there could be no later claim of collusion.

The thing about the Mini is neither here nor there, as Joe says it could be a bit of a ‘tit’ for ‘tat’ arguement. But surely his behaviour at that series of Hollyoakes ‘readings’ was solely down to him. As I commented when I wrote about the show, his challenge to Derren to ‘have a go’ (which was accepted reluctantly) produced a sitiation where he (Derren) was getting as many ‘hits’ as Joe. Joe’s interruption about an ‘affair’ which caused some consternation actually displayed a lack of sensitivity and, for me, was an obvious attempt to ‘get some power’ over, or ‘focus off’ Derren’s peformance.

Joe says he does not ask people to ‘believe’ that his gift is true. Umm, well isn’t that exactly what he is asking?

As for the solictors letter which supports Joe’s feelimgs about the nature of the show – come on folks!

You’re invited to do a show with Derren Brown. You must know his standpoint on these issues, so to latter claim you were duped into believing it was something different is a bit thin.

I have been at the filming of one of Derrens specials, I was lucky to get an invite by Objective Productions, I have seen the contract that you have to fill in as a member of the audience at these events. Every angle is covered about the nature of the show and what you are consenting to be involved in. To accept that this standard practice would not be even more ‘water-tight’ for his more controversial shows is nieve and shows a lack of understanding of how the TV Production business works.

Ofcom ruled that there was no reason to support or uphold the complaint on any of the uses Joe and his legal team presented.

In summary:-

Ofcom has not upheld this complaint of unfair treatment made by Mr Joe Power.


Derren Brown investigated claims made by Mr Power, a psychic medium from Liverpool, that he was able to communicate with the dead. The programme included footage of Mr Power conducting two one-on-one readings (with Wanda and Roz) and a session with several actors from Hollyoaks.
 Ofcom found that:

Mr Power was provided with sufficient information about the programme before participating in it.

Material facts concerning the Wanda, Hollyoaks and Roz readings were presented fairly.

Testimony given by Lee, Mr Brown?s driver, about the car that belonged to one of the Hollyoaks actors, and Mr Power?s written statement were edited fairly.


You can read the full report here on page 41.

You can visit Joes Blog Here.

Joes PR has cliamed his involvement in helping the police in several murder cases. Namely Shannon Matthews, Sarah Payne and Sally Anne Bowman.

This letter is interesting in this regard:- 

“Dear Mrs Hope


Isn’t it about time Joe Power stopped claiming to have helped the police in the search for Sally Anne Bowman’s killer? I was disgusted to see that this barefaced lie STILL features in Mr Power’s publicity material, most recently in the Isle of Man Today newspaper.

Perhaps Mr Power hopes that people will have forgotten the farcical nature of his involvement – ie telling the Daily Mirror that Ms Bowman’s spirit had revealed to him the identity of her killer, a Stephan or Stephen White, aged between 24 and 26, who worked as a delivery driver. It’s a little difficult to understand how this hot tip from beyond the grave could have helped the police as year 36 year old chef Mark Dixie was recently found guilty of Ms Bowman’s murder.

Does Mr Power have a receipt for the statements he gave to the police in the Matthews and Payne cases?

This was the text of a letter sent to Mrs Hope (the same Mrs Hope who put the complaint into Ofcom, the Mrs Hope who I believe his Joes manager).

Surely the reply to such a letter needed to be carefully thought out, offering answers to the concerns raised in order to protect her client.

So what was here response?

“Dear atkinson get a life my client stands by what is true.You must be a sad person do not email back” .
(reference to the above exchanges can be found here)

Eloquent, supportive an really saying a lot about the professionalism of those involved…. perhaps.

So there you go…

I do urge you to read about Joe on his website, that more than anything else should help convince you of his sincerity…

For me – well – the real question about mediumship is perhaps not about the objective reality of their claims (this of course is interesting and worthy of study); but about the ‘intent’ and ‘value’ of mediumistic readings for the people they are supporting. Making a living from your skills is one thing, but the psychic business at the level that folks like Joe Power work is about ‘bums on seats’, ‘turn over’ and is very very lucrative. Surely there are ethical considerations here….

Alan

At the risk of getting into hot water here, I feel the urge to make a comment or two based on last nights Haunted Cornwall FM show which took as its theme Witchcraft.

It was an active show and the discussion was vibrant.

In the UK the Laws relating to Witchcraft were repealed in 1954 so from that time it was not ‘illegal’ to practice witchcraft.

The ‘religion’ Wicca, came to the ‘fore’ after the many and various writings of Gerald Gardner.

Now that’s not to say that prior to his writings in the 1950’s there was not a practice of witchcraft, but there was no real ‘organised’ or ‘written’ doctrine. Gardner really collected together pre-existing ideas, writings, folk-lore linking them to anthropological studies about ‘pagan’ practices.

The animist tradition to which witchcraft and modern Wicca owes much of its origin is similar to those of many pre-Christian celebrations and practices.

So whereas ‘witchcraft’ (or ‘the craft’) is about the practices which have pagan-shamanic-pre-Christian origins; Wicca is the systemised ‘religion’ or ‘group of practices’ which were collated and collected from the works of Crowley (The Wiccan Rede comes directly from Crowleys Book of the Law), Gerald Gardner (the Gardnerian “Tradition”), Alex Saunders (The Alexandrian “Tradition”) and subsequent popularisers of the ‘craft’. These would notably include Starhawk, Scott Cunningham, Raymond Buckland, Janet and Stewart Farrar, John Stewart, Caitlin Stewart, Oberon Zell, and Rae Beth.

In terms of modern Witches, there are I feel several different kinds..

There are those who follow a defined Wiccan Path – generally learning from others, within groups or circles and having at their heart an agreed creed, dogma or set of teachings.

There are those who work alone, generally called ‘Hedge’. Their form of the ‘craft’ is less structured and far more eclectic. They may or may not follow the specific teachings of one of the more current popularisers, and have an independent approach to their work.

Some of these (Wiccans and Solitary Witches) may well claim some traditional ancestry – they are born witches. Whilst this is often difficult if not impossible to verify, it does sometimes create a strange kind of tension between the differing practitioners. I have witnessed a terrible kind of elitism that comes from such a situation – the kind of elitism that is in point of fact in direct opposition to the ‘love all’ message most seem to promote. Seems group psychology and personal ego gets into all religious-spiritual mixes.

There are those who like to call themselves ‘witches’, adopt the fashion and wear the symbols but have little to do with the deeper connections and spiritual practices share by the previous groups.

One of the key differences between Wiccan and others who practice The Craft is, therefore, related solely to the ‘traditions’ adhered too and the value that is placed upon ‘agreed’ teachings. For anything to be called a ‘religion’ it does need an agreed body of teachings, practices, possibly internal structures, and a clearly defined metaphysical position..

In the UK “Real Witches” actually work to overcome the pre-existing Judaeo-Christian bias and prejudices wherein notions of ‘good’ and ‘evil’, ‘black’ and ‘white’, ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ are defined by the political affiliations between Church and State. The Wiccan Rede, as a modern mission statement, for that’s what it is, calls for personal responsibility and a sense of duty towards all living things. This is a desire that is lived from the inside-out.

So there’s now been four Real Twilight Zone shows, all available from iTunes and with some very pleasing feedback.

If you’ve not visited the website yet then may I invite you to do so, and of course share it with your friends….

www.therealtwilightzone.com

I’m hoping that this brief pre-Solstice post will refresh The Rational Mystic blog, something that I have been a little remiss about, as well as invite comment, feedback and ideas for forthcoming Real Twilight Zone shows.

I am still obviously an active member of the Haunted Cornwall FM team so would like to ensure that The Real Twilight Zone complements rather than duplicates what is already on offer.

On another quick note, if you’ve not yet caught the various promotional notes on Rational Mystic Facebook, The Real Twilight Zone or on UK Mentalist Facebook, then can I briefly share some information about the forthcoming show….

The Medium, The Mentalist, The Question

The premiere is on the 26th January at St Austell Arts Theatre and brings together the skills of a professional medium and the explorations of a performing mentalist in order to ask The Question in an entertaining, informative and thought provoking way.

Check out:

www.seanceUK.com

www.spookyentertainments.com

Here’s wishing you all s Super Solstice, a Cool Yule and a great festive season.

Alan – The Rational Mystic

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

So obviously if you were listening to Haunted Cornwall FM last night you will know that Kevin Carlyon did not show up. Not sure that the mix up was his fault, think that there was a communication problem..

Obviously the astral-network was jammed last week.

I”m still hoping that we can have him on the show soon, if not I would like to speak to him personally as I”m still not sure exactly where he is coming from.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone