Do you believe in psychics?

[EwwwwDavid]

I've been to a few psychics over the years and some things they've said have been weirdly accurate, some not so much.
I had a very tragic bereavement about 12 years ago and haven't seen one since but done things I was told almost predicted what would happen.
Does anyone have any similar stories?
Ps im very much atheist and not at all 'woo' but sometimes reflect on things that are weirdly accurate.

@EarlyModernEnglish

Right. So your answer to ‘please try to explain this story’ like that pp asked, is ‘I don’t have anything to offer at all’.

What?

I’m participating in this discussion on my own terms - which, initially, were to remark that some of the explanations were a bit of a stretch. That’s it

I don’t have to solve anything. My main point is that not everything can be solved, certainly not on the internet by a random stranger anyway.

Really not sure why you’re so cross with me.

You want to solve all mysteries; I don’t.

Some explanations were a bit of a stretch. But you have none of your own to offer.

You don’t have to solve anything. But you object when others do.

It’s almost like you’re just here to have a go…

Nope, don't believe in psychics, mediums, fortune-telling, tarot cards, astrology etc,etc. In my opinion, it's all a load of money-making manipulative codswallop.

*You don’t have to solve anything. But you object when others do.

It’s almost like you’re just here to have a go…*

You seem so defensive.

This thread was ‘do you believe in psychics’ not ‘solve all the mysteries’. Surely a valid point of view is “I don’t support psychics but I like hearing about random unexplained stuff.”

I agreed with a pp who thought some of the explanations were a bit forced. I then said I wasn’t even interested in coming up with explanations (and that it’s a bit presumptuous to do so if the people who were actually there have already used their powers of thought and analysis).

Why does that make you so mad? We don’t all have to be on a mission to explain everything

It’s almost like you’re just here to have a go…

It’s almost as if you take any viewpoint that isn’t yours as an attack!

@EarlyModernEnglish

It’s almost like you’re just here to have a go…

It’s almost as if you take any viewpoint that isn’t yours as an attack!

Ok. I think if you’re so disinterested in my logic, feel free to stop tagging me in your contributions. I’m sure we’d all love to hear your opinions without my posts guiding them.

I saw a "well known" psychic years ago. I didn't have to give my name and this was before social media. He told me that the room we were in had meaning to me. It did at the time as it was the room me & my now ex husband had enitailly booked for our wedding (then cancelled, that's a different story) he also said he saw children around my feet that I loved but weren't"mine" (at that time I didn't have/wasn't trying to have children)But (years later) I then went on to complete a child care course and adopted 3 children with my 2nd husband. I don't believe in this type of stuff either! He made a few mistakes with names etc but I still think back (18 years) to what he said.

Ok. I think if you’re so disinterested in my logic, feel free to stop tagging me in your contributions. I’m sure we’d all love to hear your opinions without my posts guiding them.

That’s really quite funny, @Pumperthepumper because if you check back, my very first comment on this thread was immediately picked up by you; you tagged me and I’ve been responding to you as a result of that. How do you explain that? I was happy to have my say without you latching onto it…

@EarlyModernEnglish

Ok. I think if you’re so disinterested in my logic, feel free to stop tagging me in your contributions. I’m sure we’d all love to hear your opinions without my posts guiding them.

That’s really quite funny, @Pumperthepumper because if you check back, my very first comment on this thread was immediately picked up by you; you tagged me and I’ve been responding to you as a result of that. How do you explain that? I was happy to have my say without you latching onto it…

Your first comment was about me.

@Pumperthepumper

Yeah, it was about you (though you were one of a number of pp doing similar stuff and I didn’t register you by name) - not to you!

Mine was a fairly sweeping comment with your contribution as an example. You leapt on me and started all the tagging!

And you seem angry about having a discussion

[quote EarlyModernEnglish]@Pumperthepumper

Yeah, it was about you (though you were one of a number of pp doing similar stuff and I didn’t register you by name) - not to you!

Mine was a fairly sweeping comment with your contribution as an example. You leapt on me and started all the tagging!

And you seem angry about having a discussion [/quote]
I didn’t say it was to me, I said it was about me.

I’m just a bit frustrated that what was a fairly interesting, open-minded conversation about tricks of the mind has been sidetracked by your weird insistence that I change my wording so you understand it, that my explanations are foolish and that this whole thread should stop because you don’t want an explanation.

What do you want from this thread? Apart from an argument?

Pumper you have been like a dog with a bone the entire thread, it’s quite tedious to read now.

@HaudYerWheestFella

Pumper you have been like a dog with a bone the entire thread, it’s quite tedious to read now.

Who’s making you read it?

I’m just a bit frustrated that what was a fairly interesting, open-minded conversation about tricks of the mind has been sidetracked by your weird insistence that I change my wording so you understand it, that my explanations are foolish and that this whole thread should stop because you don’t want an explanation.

Now you’re just being belligerent and it’s not just me who thinks it!

I didn’t demand you change anything. I queried the explanation you gave because it didn’t quite fit (and surely the point of an explanation is that it explains the available facts? I know there’s this whole unreliable witness thing, but you can’t just change the existing facts into anything)

I was being quite cheery about the whole thing, reflecting on the quality of the explanations where others (including you) had been reflecting on the quality of the ‘psychics’. I thought it could go both ways - but apparently not 🤷‍♀️

I’ve just been reading up on False memory on Wikipedia, found this bit very interesting:

In the first test, 45 participants were randomly assigned to watch different videos of a car accident, in which separate videos had shown collisions at 20 mph (32 km/h), 30 mph (48 km/h) and 40 mph (64 km/h). Afterwards, participants filled out a survey. The survey asked the question, "About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?" The question always asked the same thing, except the verb used to describe the collision varied. Rather than "smashed", other verbs used included "bumped", "collided", "hit", or "contacted". Participants estimated collisions of all speeds to average between 35 mph (56 km/h) to just below 40 mph (64 km/h). If actual speed was the main factor in estimate, it could be assumed that participants would have lower estimates for lower speed collisions. Instead, the word being used to describe the collision seemed to better predict the estimate in speed rather than the speed itself.[5]

And more here:

The second experiment also showed participants videos of a car accident, but the phrasing of the follow-up questionnaire was critical in participant responses. 150 participants were randomly assigned to three conditions. Those in the first condition were asked the same question as the first study using the verb "smashed". The second group was asked the same question as the first study, replacing "smashed" with "hit". The final group was not asked about the speed of the crashed cars. The researchers then asked the participants if they had seen any broken glass, knowing that there was no broken glass in the video. The responses to this question had shown that the difference between whether broken glass was recalled or not heavily depended on the verb used. A larger sum of participants in the "smashed" group declared that there was broken glass.

One is good. She has got a lot of things right but sometimes linked events to the wrong person / time. But some things have been uncannily accurate.

@Piglet89

Misread thread title as “do you believe in physics.”

I’m like “Nope; gravity’s a fucking fabrication. I believe tiny but very strong magnets sewn into the soles of everyone’s feet shortly after birth keep us all on the ground”.

I did this too!

@Justleaveitblankthen

I love threads like this! 🤗 OP, did they just say your DH's name out of the blue, first guess? I'm a real sceptic but would love to be proved wrong. Does anyone know where they supposedly pull the future from? Is it your deceased family or friend? How do they know? Is the spirit state 'non-linear' so everything that will happen to us is already there?/unable to be changed in any way? If the info is not from the Dead, but from cards for example? It can only mean that it's already mapped out can't it? 🤔

Any psychics out there, can you tell me what I placed in my family member's coffin? Feel free to PM me. You would never be able to guess, do don't try 😎

Hi, Is it a rubber duck ?

The best one I’ve ever seen was a guy who say that he was feeling like the person died of something “in this area” and the motioned to his entire torso. Guess what - he was right!

Said*

Did anyone else read that as ' do you believe in physics'? 😂

@SpeedRunParent

Did anyone else read that as ' do you believe in physics'? 😂

Well at least 3 other people on this thread so far...