Are All Psychics & Fortune Tellers Fakes?

[Coal]

Been thinking again about this: I think that it would be a step too far to maintain that 'All Psychics and Fortune Tellers are fakes' as it would only need an example of one being accurate to demolish that statement !

Only if they were consistently accurate, past the point where random and/or informed guesses gave 'above average' results. Even then, amongst 'all the psychics' it's entirely possible that one person is guessing correctly by chance, because, given enough time and guessers, someone will. It's like flipping a coin, if enough people are doing it (say two million), someone will get 20 heads in a row. Probably

 

[Mr Bleak]

Only if they were consistently accurate, past the point where random and/or informed guesses gave 'above average' results. Even then, amongst 'all the psychics' it's entirely possible that one person is guessing correctly by chance, because, given enough time and guessers, someone will. It's like flipping a coin, if enough people are doing it (say two million), someone will get 20 heads in a row. Probably

Indeed. I also wonder what psychics /fortune tellers do -suspending disbelief for a moment- if they pick up that their client is going to die horribly and painfully in a few months time ! I would genuinely like to know the answer if any psychics /fortune tellers happen to read this.
But okay on a less dramatic note, for all life's gifts and wonderful experiences, there is frustration, sadness , and loss. Can fortune tellers /psychics, especially if they have charged money, have to deliver something that the client wants to hear regardless of what actually might happen? Perhaps the whole process is compromised.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Indeed. I also wonder what psychics /fortune tellers do -suspending disbelief for a moment- if they pick up that their client is going to die horribly and painfully in a few months time ! I would genuinely like to know the answer if any psychics /fortune tellers happen to read this.
But okay on a less dramatic note, for all life's gifts and wonderful experiences, there is frustration, sadness , and loss. Can fortune tellers /psychics, especially if they have charged money, have to deliver something that the client wants to hear regardless of what actually might happen? Perhaps the whole process is compromised.

Well I never charged anything for reading palms, tarot cards, seeing deceased family members, etc.
I would gloss over the 'Tower' card in the tarot deck if it came up in a reading, stressing the positive cards, but give a warning about whatever the subject was, to let the person know there was something coming up they should be aware of.
Once I was at a party for some newlyweds who I did not know, I was there with a friend, and was happily reading cards. The newlywed bride unfortunately kept coming over for a reading, and I was trying to avoid her, because she made me so uneasy. I got very bad feelings from her.
Sure enough, her cards were a disaster, but she was so insistent that I tell her the truth that I finally gave her the news that the cards were warning of her marriage - my friend told me that they split after 3 months.
I still read the tarot cards, but only for very close friends and for myself.

 

[Endlessly Amazed]

Only if they were consistently accurate, past the point where random and/or informed guesses gave 'above average' results. Even then, amongst 'all the psychics' it's entirely possible that one person is guessing correctly by chance, because, given enough time and guessers, someone will. It's like flipping a coin, if enough people are doing it (say two million), someone will get 20 heads in a row. Probably

If this a "wild talent" a la fort, then current statistical methods to determine if a non-random event was happening will not be sufficient. I suspect that changing the qualifying contributing factors will be necessary. An example of this would be an event of emotional importance to the seeker which has recently occurred.

As I recall, but can't remember the documentation, above average guesses have already been documented, in large numbers of trials. This was not in psychics dealing with a seeker, but in guessing cards or numbers. The anomalous results were slight but consistent; in other words, statistically significant. If one claims that, with additional trials, this significant result would disappear, this then drifts into the realm of nonfalsifiability. Poor science.

@Coal, I have had a few paranormal events happen to me, personally, with no other person acting as a psychic and relaying the information to me. The information was perceived by me directly in a flash or in a dream, and was not sought nor expected. The information was always about future events which were unimaginable, unexpected, and undesired. It was never wrong. I have had no false positives so far. Since I have told the universe who gave this to me to fuck off and stop it, the incidences have dropped to almost nothing. (Thank God. It is dreadful to see an imminent death and be able to do nothing to prevent it. Deaths by cancer and unusual accidents. It once saved my life, though, from an unexpected traffic accident.)

There is a certain Paul on the road to Damascus quality about the divide between people who have experienced this and people who have not.

I am a scientist and understand designing, qualifying, and evaluating evidence. So are you. The difference between us is that I have had anomalous experiences and you have not. I have had (more than) a single instance which rejects the null hypothesis. But I cannot prove it to you, and since I can't control when this happens, I cannot demonstrate this in controlled conditions. Perhaps others can - I hope so.

I think your premise is not robust because it does not take into account the constraints of the phenomena. You likely think my premise is not robust because I can't offer a way to force the phenomena into a shape which your view of science can examine.

 

[Coal]

If this a "wild talent" a la fort, then current statistical methods to determine if a non-random event was happening will not be sufficient. I suspect that changing the qualifying contributing factors will be necessary. An example of this would be an event of emotional importance to the seeker which has recently occurred.

If a phenomena cannot be distinguished from noise or random occurrences, then it's not a phenomenon, it's noise.

If such phenomenon requires a specific and repeatable set of circumstances, then those might form part of a more specific hypothesis which might be tested.

As I recall, but can't remember the documentation, above average guesses have already been documented, in large numbers of trials. This was not in psychics dealing with a seeker, but in guessing cards or numbers. The anomalous results were slight but consistent; in other words, statistically significant. If one claims that, with additional trials, this significant result would disappear, this then drifts into the realm of nonfalsifiability. Poor science.

As is using anecdotal evidence - cite the source for the experiment mentioned and I'll answer that comprehensively.

@Coal, I have had a few paranormal events happen to me, personally, with no other person acting as a psychic and relaying the information to me. The information was perceived by me directly in a flash or in a dream, and was not sought nor expected. The information was always about future events which were unimaginable, unexpected, and undesired. It was never wrong. I have had no false positives so far. Since I have told the universe who gave this to me to fuck off and stop it, the incidences have dropped to almost nothing. (Thank God. It is dreadful to see an imminent death and be able to do nothing to prevent it. Deaths by cancer and unusual accidents. It once saved my life, though, from an unexpected traffic accident.)

As scientist I'm sure you understand that a sample size of '1' and a self report '1' at that, has no statistical validity whatsoever.

There is a certain Paul on the road to Damascus quality about the divide between people who have experienced this and people who have not.

Indeed, but some leap at the fantastic and others consider all the mundane and more likely possibilities before considering physic happenings.

I am a scientist and understand designing, qualifying, and evaluating evidence. So are you. The difference between us is that I have had anomalous experiences and you have not. I have had (more than) a single instance which rejects the null hypothesis. But I cannot prove it to you, and since I can't control when this happens, I cannot demonstrate this in controlled conditions. Perhaps others can - I hope so.

You assume I've not had any kind of anomalous experience, not that I know what your definition of such is.

I think your premise is not robust because it does not take into account the constraints of the phenomena. You likely think my premise is not robust because I can't offer a way to force the phenomena into a shape which your view of science can examine.

Both of these statement are null as the phenomena hasn't so far been shown unequivocally to exist with any constraints.

It's seems odd to claim further unspecified constraints on a hypotheses for which there is no empirical support. If you want to form a hypothesis with such constraints and design an experiment that is beyond all criticism and show the world a whole new force is out there, be my guest. Happy to review it for you.

 

[Mr Bleak]

Well I never charged anything for reading palms, tarot cards, seeing deceased family members, etc.
I would gloss over the 'Tower' card in the tarot deck if it came up in a reading, stressing the positive cards, but give a warning about whatever the subject was, to let the person know there was something coming up they should be aware of.
Once I was at a party for some newlyweds who I did not know, I was there with a friend, and was happily reading cards. The newlywed bride unfortunately kept coming over for a reading, and I was trying to avoid her, because she made me so uneasy. I got very bad feelings from her.
Sure enough, her cards were a disaster, but she was so insistent that I tell her the truth that I finally gave her the news that the cards were warning of her marriage - my friend told me that they split after 3 months.
I still read the tarot cards, but only for very close friends and for myself.

Thank you for offering an insight. I notice that you talk about 'stressing the positive cards' and giving a 'warning' . What is your role in the process -are you more of a guide or advisor to assist the questioner to deal with whatever they are facing or may face in the future? I hope that you don't mind me asking. I am genuinely enquiring rather than trying to disrespect what you are doing.

 

[Endlessly Amazed]

If a phenomena cannot be distinguished from noise or random occurrences, then it's not a phenomenon, it's noise.

A: It happened to me so it was not noise; it was a phenomenon.

If such phenomenon requires a specific and repeatable set of circumstances, then those might form part of a more specific hypothesis which might be tested.
A: I agree, but I do not know what those specific circumstance are, even for me as a single observer.

As is using anecdotal evidence - cite the source for the experiment mentioned and I'll answer that comprehensively.
A: I can't be bothered. Coal, there are several different statistical analyses of the evidence. If I run across them, I'll post. I do understand that to you it is anecdotal as you are in a tertiary position to the purpoted evidence.

As scientist I'm sure you understand that a sample size of '1' and a self report '1' at that, has no statistical validity whatsoever.
A: No shit sherlock. I was recounting my actual experience. An accumulation of anecdotes is a basis for further exploration, and not necessarily a basis for rejecting. This is bad science: to rely on statistical validity alone. If anomalies occur, and they are out of control of the observers, this does not invalidate the observance, only limits its potential applicability and interpretation. Further research is needed. I spent a big chunk of my career triangulating evidence, often in hard-to-pin-down, murky data sets. I worked in population metrics (parameters), so statistical validity was irrelevant. Big chunks of science in different fields do not rely on statistics alone.

Indeed, but some leap at the fantastic and others consider all the mundane and more likely possibilities before considering physic happenings.
A: I agree. I do not see where I leapt at the fantastic. Please give some details of where I have done this.

You assume I've not had any kind of anomalous experience, not that I know what your definition of such is.

Both of these statement are null as the phenomena hasn't so far been shown unequivocally to exist with any constraints. A: Not to me. I experienced what I did, and my not being able to capture any data about the experience which you find acceptable does not nullify it for me, or the other people who were affected by the premonitions.

It's seems odd to claim further unspecified constraints on a hypotheses for which there is no empirical support. If you want to form a hypothesis with such constraints and design an experiment that is beyond all criticism and show the world a whole new force is out there, be my guest. Happy to review it for you.

A: Why thank you! I shall call upon you. (and note I use no animated emojis)

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Thank you for offering an insight. I notice that you talk about 'stressing the positive cards' and giving a 'warning' . What is your role in the process -are you more of a guide or advisor to assist the questioner to deal with whatever they are facing or may face in the future? I hope that you don't mind me asking. I am genuinely enquiring rather than trying to disrespect what you are doing.

When I read the tarot cards, I ask the person to shuffle them and cut the cards three times.
Then I do a spread of 10 cards, after checking the bottom card on the deck also.
After looking at all 10 cards and getting a general idea of what the subject matter is, I give them pointers for the current time and future.
The problem is that so many are only interested in when they're going to hit the lottery, or when they're coming into money, which is silly and why I don't do it much anymore. And I cannot answer dozens of questions, the cards are theirs - they have shuffled and cut them and they say certain things.
The cards, to me, are as you said, a guide. Sometimes they tell of an upcoming move, or a life change, a baby on the way, or a warning.

 

[charliebrown]

Ronnie Jersey,

You talked about “ glossing over “.

In the past, I mentioned my wife and I were at a local museum fair for raising funds.

Most of the kid’s stuff was close to the museum building, but my wife and I noticed an obscure tent where the cars parked on the grass.

In the tent was a kindly older women ( like a mother figure) who was doing Tarot card readings.

Now let me make it clear, I don’t know nothing about Tarot Cards.

So, this lady started her reading and then stopped using going to the bathroom as the excuse, apologized and left.

What a strangeness.

The next day one of my wife’s elderly aunt died.

Was this all connected ?

 

[Coal]

If a phenomena cannot be distinguished from noise or random occurrences, then it's not a phenomenon, it's noise.

A: It happened to me so it was not noise; it was a phenomenon.

If it just happened to you, it's not possible to determine it was anything other than a chance event.

If this a "wild talent" a la fort, then current statistical methods to determine if a non-random event was happening will not be sufficient. I suspect that changing the qualifying contributing factors will be necessary. An example of this would be an event of emotional importance to the seeker which has recently occurred.

As I recall, but can't remember the documentation, above average guesses have already been documented, in large numbers of trials. This was not in psychics dealing with a seeker, but in guessing cards or numbers. The anomalous results were slight but consistent; in other words, statistically significant. If one claims that, with additional trials, this significant result would disappear, this then drifts into the realm of nonfalsifiability. Poor science.

If such phenomenon requires a specific and repeatable set of circumstances, then those might form part of a more specific hypothesis which might be tested.

A: I agree, but I do not know what those specific circumstance are, even for me as a single observer.

Then there is only a belief, nothing more.

As is using anecdotal evidence - cite the source for the experiment mentioned and I'll answer that comprehensively.

A: I can't be bothered.

Ok, makes sense.

As scientist I'm sure you understand that a sample size of '1' and a self report '1' at that, has no statistical validity whatsoever.

A: No shit sherlock. I was recounting my actual experience. An accumulation of anecdotes is a basis for further exploration, and not necessarily a basis for rejecting. This is bad science: to rely on statistical validity alone. If anomalies occur, and they are out of control of the observers, this does not invalidate the observance, only limits its potential applicability and interpretation. Further research is needed. I spent a big chunk of my career triangulating evidence, often in hard-to-pin-down, murky data sets. I worked in population metrics (parameters), so statistical validity was irrelevant. Big chunks of science in different fields do not rely on statistics alone.

Anecdotes are part of the observation process. They might mean something, they might not. Apart from anything else, if 1000 people think a silly thing, it's still a silly thing. A hypothesis might be formed from such observations. An experiment might be designed to test such a hypothesis. At no point before this do the anecdotes become data.

Also, I'm not invalidating the observance. I'm saying it does not necessarily mean anything.

I didn't say I was relying on statistical validity alone, although for showing a null hypothesis may be rejected, they really are really essential.

Indeed, but some leap at the fantastic and others consider all the mundane and more likely possibilities before considering physic happenings.

A: I agree. I do not see where I leapt at the fantastic. Please give some details of where I have done this.

I didn't say you did. I was making the general point that the 'goto' explanation for some is mystical or outlandish when the mundane is generally far more likely and it's a good idea to consider that first before figuratively heading for 'alien's, although I'd add that the mundane can include the law of very big numbers and how even the weirdest 1 in a million coincidence will happen to someone, somewhere. Quite often.

If such phenomenon requires a specific and repeatable set of circumstances, then those might form part of a more specific hypothesis which might be tested.

A: I agree, but I do not know what those specific circumstance are, even for me as a single observer.

Then you still have nothing but a belief.

It's seems odd to claim further unspecified constraints on a hypotheses for which there is no empirical support. If you want to form a hypothesis with such constraints and design an experiment that is beyond all criticism and show the world a whole new force is out there, be my guest. Happy to review it for you.

A: Why thank you! I shall call upon you. (and note I use no animated emojis)

I won't hold my breath. There's never been a better time to run controlled experiments on a wide variety of psychic phenomena, and weirdly no-one's pulled it off yet - it would be the coup of the century if someone did. Of course, statistically, that's not nearly so significant as the very Bayesian view that at this juncture, absence of evidence is starting to look very much like evidence of absence.

I think I got all that in the right order

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Ronnie Jersey,

You talked about “ glossing over “.

In the past, I mentioned my wife and I were at a local museum fair for raising funds.

Most of the kid’s stuff was close to the museum building, but my wife and I noticed an obscure tent where the cars parked on the grass.

In the tent was a kindly older women ( like a mother figure) who was doing Tarot card readings.

Now let me make it clear, I don’t know nothing about Tarot Cards.

So, this lady started her reading and then stopped using going to the bathroom as the excuse, apologized and left.

What a strangeness.

The next day one of my wife’s elderly aunt died.

Was this all connected ?

Who knows, possibly.
That woman who read your wife's cards certainly did act strangely, the cards may have all been the cards of loss, death, etc., and perhaps she did not wish to reveal what they said to your wife.
A close friend of mine came over one night in a panic, she wanted her cards read for a reason.
It was very upsetting because she shuffled them and they came out very badly, but she asked for the truth so I told her.
And sure enough, the cards were right.
On the flip side, someone else I know was extremely upset about an important issue, insisted on having his cards done, and they came out wonderfully. He did not believe it, but again the cards turned out to be correct.
Sounds strange I know.

 

[Recycled1]

Elsewhere on this forum I mentioned that I had a random tarot reading .
The cards were all OK until what should appear but the Falling Tower.
THe lady reader and I looked at each other slightly apprehensively, because we both knew that it might mean trouble.

After the reading, and some hours later, I realised it was showing me literally what I was considering having done to the house -some knocking down of walls to give me a downstairs toilet.

Nothing bad happened, and after alot of consideration I decided not to bother with the toilet disruption.
I'm 100% sure the Tower card was just to be taken absolutely literally at the moment in time, but the tarot reader had no idea of my building work plans.

THings aren't all as bad as they may seem!

 

[PeteS]

Can fortune tellers /psychics, especially if they have charged money, have to deliver something that the client wants to hear regardless of what actually might happen?

Won't repeat my last experience, but something I have only just remembered after more than 20 years ( because someone reminded me of it) is the fact that before the reading I asked the medium not to pass on any bad news. His response was that he could not do that because he was compelled to pass on everything he foresaw or was told. This makes me wonder that the reading he gave me over the next 15 minutes was put in such a convoluted way so as to soften the blow of what was going to be the most devastating experience of my life. One part of the whole mystery solved perhaps.

 

[catseye]

So many of the tests on psychics seem to be of the variety of getting one person to look at cards and try to 'send' the image to the psychic receiver. What if any form of psychic message has to have emotion involved? Would it not be better to find 'senders' who have recently suffered an emotional moment and get the psychic to 'read' (obviously without seeing the sender, otherwise body language just overrides any form of psychic ability) that emotion?

 

[escargot]

Won't repeat my last experience, but something I have only just remembered after more than 20 years ( because someone reminded me of it) is the fact that before the reading I asked the medium not to pass on any bad news. His response was that he could not do that because he was compelled to pass on everything he foresaw or was told. This makes me wonder that the reading he gave me over the next 15 minutes was put in such a convoluted way so as to soften the blow of what was going to be the most devastating experience of my life. One part of the whole mystery solved perhaps.

As I've mentioned, I was told exactly what dreadful occurrence was heading my way some time before it occurred, and I wrote it down at the time. One detail was that someone I loved who liked to travel would go far away, as far as a person can go, but I would see them again.

I thought 'How far can he go? The moon?'

Wasn't far wrong.

I did see him again, at the undertaker's.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Elsewhere on this forum I mentioned that I had a random tarot reading .
The cards were all OK until what should appear but the Falling Tower.
THe lady reader and I looked at each other slightly apprehensively, because we both knew that it might mean trouble.

After the reading, and some hours later, I realised it was showing me literally what I was considering having done to the house -some knocking down of walls to give me a downstairs toilet.

Nothing bad happened, and after alot of consideration I decided not to bother with the toilet disruption.
I'm 100% sure the Tower card was just to be taken absolutely literally at the moment in time, but the tarot reader had no idea of my building work plans.

THings aren't all as bad as they may seem!

That's why the cards have to be read in the context of the subject matter -
Within a 10 card spread will be hints on what they are about.
For instance, the 'Death' card may not really be about death at all, but the ending of something - a job, a relationship, etc.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Regarding the unsolved Lizzie Borden murder case in 1892 Fall River, Massachusetts:
John Vinnicum Morse was Lizzie's uncle and had arrived at their Fall River home the night before the hatchet murders of her father and step mother. He was long suspected of having knowledge of the murders.
But according to this newspaper clipping, Morse had gone to a fortune teller shortly before the murders, and she outright refused money to tell him his fortune saying, 'You don't want it told'!

 

[brownmane]

@Ronnie Jersey, I know that you do readings for friends and family and don't charge for them, but I had heard that people charging for readings or any type of scrying, cannot out right tell their customers any such thing relating to an impending death or disaster. They can only couch them in vague warnings. Do you know if this is true?

Seeing as how they can only advertise their services as "for entertainment only", I think this is where the constraints come from ie. run as a business.

 

[Mr Bleak]

Ronnie Jersey,

You talked about “ glossing over “.

In the past, I mentioned my wife and I were at a local museum fair for raising funds.

Most of the kid’s stuff was close to the museum building, but my wife and I noticed an obscure tent where the cars parked on the grass.

In the tent was a kindly older women ( like a mother figure) who was doing Tarot card readings.

Now let me make it clear, I don’t know nothing about Tarot Cards.

So, this lady started her reading and then stopped using going to the bathroom as the excuse, apologized and left.

What a strangeness.

The next day one of my wife’s elderly aunt died.

Was this all connected ?

Sorry. I just don't see a connection. What am I missing?

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

@Ronnie Jersey, I know that you do readings for friends and family and don't charge for them, but I had heard that people charging for readings or any type of scrying, cannot out right tell their customers any such thing relating to an impending death or disaster. They can only couch them in vague warnings. Do you know if this is true?

Seeing as how they can only advertise their services as "for entertainment only", I think this is where the constraints come from ie. run as a business.

I have no idea.
I know one of my friends was going through a really unhappy time at one point, and she went to a 'reader' who was a fraud, as rumor had it anyway.
She was charged hundreds of dollars for this woman to burn 'candles' to remove a supposed 'curse' on her life. I thought it was hilarious, but my friend paid it, not that it did any good.
Much of it is just preying on the confused and unhappy.

 

[Mr Bleak]

This is a most interesting discussion ! I think that what makes me lean more towards scepticism is that so much of the the case for 'fortune telling' and consulting psychics is anecdotal- what has already been stated . Now I am not trying to devalue anyone's personal experiences at all, but I also weigh up the fact that I know people who have been to psychics et al and got readings that they have felt to be inaccurate or downright wrong.
I am probably more interested in why people visit psychics and fortune tellers. On the balance of probabilities, seems that said individuals want comfort and re-assurance of some sort which in turn will have an impact on what the outcome of any reading can mean.

 

[Iris]

I have found with psychics that sometimes they get a couple of things right but are not right with others.
There used to be a psychic at Phillip Island who was quite accurate.
She told my friend that her friend who was down there with her would soon be not talking t to her and she thought it would be an argument but a couple of weeks later she died of a heart attack.
When she went next she queried the psychic and she said that if she saw death she put it another way.
When I saw her she told me I would meet a man and pinpointed where he lived.
I did actually meet him oline and went for lunch at a shopping centre in between us.
However his children kept ringing to see that he was ok and nothing came of it.
On the other hand she also told me my Mother was there and had a message for my sister.
I thought that would be right she was always the favourite.
She said that my sister's husband had cancer and needed to go to the doctor straight away, so I contacted her and he went to the doctor, but there was nothing wrong with him. His mother however died of lung cancer not long afterwards although she was not a smoker.

 

[escargot]

I know people who have been to psychics et al and got readings that they have felt to be inaccurate or downright wrong.

For sure. I'm not in the habit of seeing psychics, haven't even done it handful of times. It's been at someone else's insistence (curiosity) or as a gift appointment (politeness).

One decided I was a lonely lesbian sports teacher and assured me there was a 'lovely woman out there' for me.
About as wrong as can be.

Halfway through, we both heard something being posted with a clatter through the front door.
She said 'Ooh, that'll be the free paper. Noisy beggar!'

We were the only people in the house. When I was leaving - no newspaper on the mat.
Mrs Spookiness was seriously rattled, just like anyone who's scared of ghosts.

 

[Salmonellus]

When I read the tarot cards, I ask the person to shuffle them and cut the cards three times.
Then I do a spread of 10 cards, after checking the bottom card on the deck also.
After looking at all 10 cards and getting a general idea of what the subject matter is, I give them pointers for the current time and future.
The problem is that so many are only interested in when they're going to hit the lottery, or when they're coming into money, which is silly and why I don't do it much anymore. And I cannot answer dozens of questions, the cards are theirs - they have shuffled and cut them and they say certain things.
The cards, to me, are as you said, a guide. Sometimes they tell of an upcoming move, or a life change, a baby on the way, or a warning.

Just a random thought, Ronnie, have you ever tried an absentee reading, defined as doing the cards for someone who isn't physically present, or do you feel that having the person there to shuffle the cards is important ? If, as a lot of people suspect, the Tarot has no power in itself but just acts as a stimulus to the reader's own clairvoyance, absentee readings should be just as productive.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

Just a random thought, Ronnie, have you ever tried an absentee reading, defined as doing the cards for someone who isn't physically present, or do you feel that having the person there to shuffle the cards is important ? If, as a lot of people suspect, the Tarot has no power in itself but just acts as a stimulus to the reader's own clairvoyance, absentee readings should be just as productive.

No, in my view the person has to be present to shuffle the cards themselves - don't forget they can shuffle them into different positions (upside down or rightside up, which have different meanings), and put their own vibes into them.
They also have to cut the cards.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

I have found with psychics that sometimes they get a couple of things right but are not right with others.
There used to be a psychic at Phillip Island who was quite accurate.
She told my friend that her friend who was down there with her would soon be not talking t to her and she thought it would be an argument but a couple of weeks later she died of a heart attack.
When she went next she queried the psychic and she said that if she saw death she put it another way.
When I saw her she told me I would meet a man and pinpointed where he lived.
I did actually meet him oline and went for lunch at a shopping centre in between us.
However his children kept ringing to see that he was ok and nothing came of it.
On the other hand she also told me my Mother was there and had a message for my sister.
I thought that would be right she was always the favourite.
She said that my sister's husband had cancer and needed to go to the doctor straight away, so I contacted her and he went to the doctor, but there was nothing wrong with him. His mother however died of lung cancer not long afterwards although she was not a smoker.

No one is perfect, and it is difficult to look into someone else's life to find the meanings in the cards, or a reading.
The person has to take the reader's advice and apply it to their own life.
Which is another reason I don't do it much anymore - if the Ace of Pentacles comes up in a reading (money), I tie it in with the other cards, but there are those who think they are going to automatically win the lottery tomorrow, and that is not the actual meaning.

 

[Coal]

Only if they were consistently accurate, past the point where random and/or informed guesses gave 'above average' results. Even then, amongst 'all the psychics' it's entirely possible that one person is guessing correctly by chance, because, given enough time and guessers, someone will. It's like flipping a coin, if enough people are doing it (say two million), someone will get 20 heads in a row. Probably

By a wild coincidence (yes it was) I got a notification of this the other day:

The Transparent Psi Project: the results are in, so where are all the headlines?
https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/03/...esults-are-in-so-where-are-all-the-headlines/

This article is about the very determined and even handed attempt to replicate Professor Daryl Bem’s (2011) series of studies the results of which supported the hypothesis that some precognition is real. The Transparent Psi folk not only made everything fully public, they populated the peer reviewer panel from both sceptics and believers in equal amounts. Nice tbh.

Best to use their summary:

This project aimed to demonstrate the use of research methods designed to improve the reliability of scientific findings in psychological science. Using this rigorous methodology, we could not replicate the positive findings of Bem’s 2011 Experiment 1. This finding does not confirm, nor contradict the existence of ESP in general, and this was not the point of our study. Instead, the results tell us that (1) the original experiment was likely affected by methodological flaws or it was a chance finding, and (2) the paradigm used in the original study is probably not useful for detecting ESP effects if they exist. The methodological innovations implemented in this study enable the readers to trust and verify our results which is an important step forward in achieving trustworthy science.

Sadly, Prof. Bem's results didn't replicate.

 

[gordonrutter]

Edinburgh has a new museum which on a nearly weekly basis has announcements such as this

You can't make it up.

 

[Coal]

Edinburgh has a new museum which on a nearly weekly basis has announcements such as this

View attachment 65982
You can't make it up.

If you could, you'd be a fortune teller.

 

[Ronnie Jersey]

We've been looking for a storage space, preferably a garage nearby, in which to store items we have in the basement, because this is a major flood zone and we have not found a new apartment yet. Just missed a garage close by that was listed on craigslist last summer, it was perfect but it had been rented.
We've looked at several that were damp or had leaky walls, very expensive or too far away.
But I've driven past the garage around the corner many times, waiting to see if it would come available again. I kept telling Mr. R that I had a feeling about it.
Last night I saw an ad on craigslist for a garage in our town, called and found it was the very same one I've been waiting for and made a deposit on it.
Mr. R just smiled.