to ask if anyone has had a psychic reading that was extremely accurate?

I had one that was very accurate in some parts. Firstly the lady talked all about the type of person I was which was actually so accurate I cried (not putting much faith in this bit, could have been a lucky guess). Towards the end of the session we talked about a family member who had recently been through a life threatening accident and had a long recovery time ahead of them, she talked in detail about what had happened and advised that he speak to a distant family friend who had been through a similar thing and named that person.

This psychic is renowned where I live and even if it was coldreading I did enjoy it

my dm had one with someone, and I saw the same person and thought he was a joke but he told her things with names that even she didn't know. Namely that her 'dil' had recently had a termination. He went into great detail about ds and dil and their relationship and knew a lot of things. Part of me thinks he knew them though!

Oh dear, Rose ... if you research even a little you'll find that at least the first three of those have been shown to be frauds; I'm afraid I ran out of enthusiasm for googling the rest

I shouldn't really dignify the remark about police acknowledgment with a response, but again, wouldn't you expect there to be even one which had been made public? Or just a single case which can't be instantly demolished by the briefest search? Or do you seriously suggest it's some sort of conspiracy theory, with police determined to keep this rare and precious facility from the rest of us??

Rose, that link takes you to an Internet zine list of 'top ten' psychic/police 'cases', one of which involves a murder that happened in 1692, and not one of which contains a single reference to any credible external proof of what they are claiming. The website also includes such quality material like 'Beautiful Women with Wide Hips' and 'Top Ten Day Jobs of Serial Killers'. Are you actually claiming that this website offers any kind of credible proof of effective psychic involvement in solving police cases?

akorra.com/2012/07/27/top-10-mysterious-police-cases-solved-by-psychics/
As if the police are going to publicly acknowledge that they get help from psychics, but that doesn't mean they don't.

not everyone is motivated by money or willing to expose themselves to the horrendous publicity and mixed adulation/hate that would follow

Fully agree, Meerka - everyone's different and what would appeal to one might not to someone else

It's not as if the self-proclaimed psychics are rare, though; a quick search on Yell shows over 30 just in my small town. Even so, to my knowledge nobody has ever demonstrated their "powers" under genuinely independent, properly structured observation

Isn't that just a bit too convenient??

It just seems odd that of the many 'psychics' who are without dispute motivated by money - the grandstanders who book out theatres, for instance, Sally Morgan and co - and who are very happy to use their 'powers' for cash, not one has put their powers forward for consideration. SM has dozens of tv appearances and newspaper articles about her. All she has to do is fill in a form that asks for a three-line description of her 'powers', sign it and stick it in the post along with some tv clips and news clippings.

The point about kangeroo care is that sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, it's hard to pin down the exact mechanisms and causes (and as hakluyt said, the result is improvement in babies which is great!)

But you can say the same thing about lots of things- open heart surgery, aspirins........the point is, sometimes it does, demonstrably,measureably work. Psychic ability demonstrably, measurably doesn't.

Just maybe any real psychic ability works a bit the same way? (if there is any real psychic ability at all; as I say I don't really believe in it, I just can't quite exclude the possibility)

So psychic ability only works if there isn't an objective observer watching? Bit of a coincidence, surely?

I'll agree that the Randi challenge is a strong straw in the wind that there isn't anything to the psychic claims. Though not everyone is motivated by money or willing to expose themselves to the horrendous publicity and mixed adulation/hate that would follow.

agreed about calling spirits, totally. Im not talking about all psychic phenomena everywhere etc. I don't believe that the Delphic oracle was real either =) I'm talking about the sort of stuff fackinell believes she can do.

The point about kangeroo care is that sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, it's hard to pin down the exact mechanisms and causes (and as hakluyt said, the result is improvement in babies which is great!). Just maybe any real psychic ability works a bit the same way? (if there is any real psychic ability at all; as I say I don't really believe in it, I just can't quite exclude the possibility)

Im just not aware of any longitudinal reasonably well carried out studies of psychics which sound like the only way anything could ever be 'proved'. Write the stuff down or record it, then see what turns out to have happened 20 years later. Take into account unconscious bias by the person who the prediction was about, if possible. I don't think they'll find very much, if at all actualy. But it would be interesting

I'm a believer ask have had too many occurrences to explain. I don't generally discuss it unless I am in the company of someone who will discuss it rationally

And this year's award for the most ironic post on the whole internet goes to......

Yes Hakluyt, it is I'd a pity posters insult our intelligence by linking this proven fake's own website, but if anyone's interested in reading a few more measured remarks, this might help: www.globalnetresearch.com/statements.html

And in response to the various comments about psychic abilities not having been proved invalid ... first of all, independent observers have often shown exactly that. Mainly, though, that's not how these things work; the onus is rightly on those claiming such world-changing powers to move the discussion forward by sharing this responsibly. They don't, though - instead they say they're not interested in publicity / don't want the money / don't think what they do is that special / think the tests are unfair and so on and so on

Shame, really ...

From Wikipedia's "Psychic Detective" page:

No psychic detective has ever been praised or given official recognition by the FBI or US national news for solving a crime, preventing a crime, or finding a kidnap victim or corpse.[52][53]

The whole page is worth a look.

Noreen Renier has been multiply debunked, Rose, and (aside from her own well-oiled publicity machine) these days best known for filing for bankruptcy and attempting to overturn damages awarded to sceptical investigators probing her claims in various US States.

" I simply can't see that psychic stuff has been shown to not work in all cases. Im not trying to be deliberately dense here. But all we can do is say that in the cases we know, it's been debunked ... and by it's very nature it's unlikely to be something you can pin down on a stick or as reliable as the sun rising."
But if we're talking about the Randi challenge, all someone has to do to get past the first state is do their thing with an objective observer watching. And loads have tried and no one's managed it.

Is that the same Noreen Reiner who has had, I think, 5 court rulings (including from the US Supreme Court) saying that she has not been employed by the FBI or any police force?

But Meerka, gene mutation is a natural occurrence. With a large enough sample and enough time, it would happen in observed conditions. And there's nothing mysterious about kangaroo care, surely? At any rate, it works as well in clinical conditions as outside of them. And different people responding differently physiologically, absolutely, but there's no equivalence to 'psychics' who are able to call up great-aunt Trudy, or maybe Judy, with a message for someobe beginning with J, or G, in front of a paying, credulous client with a vested interest in believing, but not while being observed by a sceptic...?

www.noreenrenier.com There you go Hak, but I'm sure you'll have a ready answer.

So we're supposed to see how wonderful, credible and what a boon to the police/ FBI Noreen Renier is because of what she has written on her own website ?

If I had my own website, about myself, I'd be pretty superhuman too.

stuff like this, lipsync (to copy paste what I put above):

Kangeroo care. Neither can you replicate random gene mutations in a lab; but they still happen (evolution). Nor can you replicate in a lab the effects of some drug trials eg giving ondansetron to preg women. There are large scale studies, but you can't do that in a lab. All sorts of practical difficulties get in the way, one of which is that people sometime respond differently physiologically.

hakluyt I simply can't see that psychic stuff has been shown to not work in all cases. Im not trying to be deliberately dense here. But all we can do is say that in the cases we know, it's been debunked ... and by it's very nature it's unlikely to be something you can pin down on a stick or as reliable as the sun rising.

if (if) there's anything real out there - if - then it's presumably likely to be unreliable by it's nature.

www.noreenrenier.com There you go Hak, but I'm sure you'll have a ready answer.

Sigh.
Psychic, eh?

Meerka- I don't quite understand. There's a difference between saying "this works but we don't know why[yet]" and "this has been shown not to work" So a baby that's being given kangaroo care gets better. We might not know exactly why yet, although there are lots of educated guesses- but the end result is a well baby.

What kind of thing do you mean, Meerka?

I'd still like an explanation for those occurances that are real that cannot be replicated outside a lab or on demand. The subtle stuff, the stuff where you can't put a coin in the slot and get a shiny result every time. Doesn't have to be anything to do with psychic phenomena.

opheliaria To convince those of us struggling to keep open minds I'm afraid you'll have to do a lot better than suggesting the Randi test isn't fair ... even the briefest reading shows otherwise, and as many have said it doesn't involve complicated scientific tests, just that the applicant does what they claim they can when properly observed

You don't even need to read about the test since there are countless clips of Randi attending a supposed "demonstration" of paranormal powers. None of them can support their claims - they hum and haw, giggle and fidget, claim that the testing conditions they agreed to are now somehow "unfair" (aha!! ) and generally make fools of themselves

I asked several pages ago if anyone could show where a crime, disappearance or whatever had actually been solved - or even provably helped long - by psychics/mediums, etc, but nobody's offered anything so far ... ??

I also imagine that the fact that Randi Foundation applicants have to provide at least one of the following -

A signed letter by a medical doctor, faculty member of a recognised university, or a professional non-university research scientist to say the applicant is serious and the claim merits testing

A newspaper article, tv appearance or book account (not self-published) about the power

A video of themselves demonstrating the powers

• narrows down the field of applicants.