CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Browne died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog].
The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.
Edit: corrected spelling of her last name
CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Brown died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog]. The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.I bet she didn't predict that... Take care, Derek
Good riddence to her fraudulencey. I’ll grant her a million years in heaven if she comes back to haunt me. Of course her promoters will spin her death to promote more books and the sale of Ouija boards will now skyrocket as she makes even more predictions … From beyond the grave (cue eerie music and Vincent Price over voice).
Cap’t Jack
CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Brown died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog]. The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.Nobody is 100% bad. She did provide a lot of laughs to many people. Lois
CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Brown died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog]. The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.Nobody is 100% bad. She did provide a lot of laughs to many people. Lois Yeah, but apparently she swindled so many people that at one point she was raking in $3 million per year. I don't think she provided enough laughs to balance the damage she did. I've often thought that if I only lacked ethics I could be rich too.
CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Brown died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog]. The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.Nobody is 100% bad. She did provide a lot of laughs to many people. Lois Yeah, but apparently she swindled so many people that at one point she was raking in $3 million per year. I don't think she provided enough laughs to balance the damage she did. I've often thought that if I only lacked ethics I could be rich too. Yes, apparently that's often what it takes. Someone has wisely asked, "Why do psychics have to ask you for your name?"
I always wondered why they don’t take checks.
Hello DarronS and Lois,
Ms. Browne certainly did no favors for those of us who have experienced the paranormal. I also think most people who have experienced paranormal events are not inclined to discuss with many people, as the norm is for people not to believe. As far as I know, none of my experiences could be controlled and that makes it very difficult to replicate and ‘prove’ that they were not just coincidence.
Anyway, it’s my opinion that people like Ms. Browne and those who run psychic hotlines are the least likely to have any psychic ‘abilities’ and serve to bring confusion and lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena.
Hello DarronS and Lois, Ms. Browne certainly did no favors for those of us who have experienced the paranormal. I also think most people who have experienced paranormal events are not inclined to discuss with many people, as the norm is for people not to believe. As far as I know, none of my experiences could be controlled and that makes it very difficult to replicate and 'prove' that they were not just coincidence. Anyway, it's my opinion that people like Ms. Browne and those who run psychic hotlines are the least likely to have any psychic 'abilities' and serve to bring confusion and lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena.I'm not sure that anyone could lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena. It already has none. Lois
I shall be generous in giving you the benefit of doubt that you are speaking for yourself and not each living person. That is of course, unless you expect everyone thinks the same.
I'm not sure that anyone could lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena. It already has none. Lois
I agree with Lois.
Not a surprise DarronS, but why you felt the need to express your agreement is a surprise; considering it says nothing about other people beside yourself and Lois. And even if everyone on this forum agrees with you and Lois, it still say nothing about whether there are others who do not agree.
It does explain some in regards to why ‘newbies’ tend to have short stays on this forum, as CFI seems less like a center for inquiry, than a center for people who think alike. I tend to prefer forums where there is more diversity of thought.
I agree with Lois.
...CFI seems less like a center for inquiry, than a center for people who think alike. I tend to prefer forums where there is more diversity of thought.CFI is dedicated to critical thinking. From the forum's Statement of Purpose:
The CFI Forum is operated by the Center for Inquiry, a nonprofit educational and advocacy organization. The Forum supports the interests of CFI by creating an online community of supporters and interested inquirers into CFI’s areas of concern, which can be generally described as advancing the enlightenment project, fostering an evidence-based, scientific outlook and humanist values.The "evidence-based-scientific outlook" part excludes your imaginary paranormal experiences. Yes we do tend to think alike around here: we dismiss anecdotes and insist upon empirical evidence when making claims. People who choose to believe stuff for emotional reasons usually do not stick around long.
Well DarrenS - my experiences are not imaginary. However, that brings up another observation… you and the other think alikes tend to lack any hint of imagination or creativity in your thought.
Well DarrenS - my experiences are not imaginary.Show me the empirical evidence.
However, that brings up another observation... you and the other think alikes tend to lack any hint of imagination or creativity in your thought.That is funny. We know the difference between fantasy and reality, therefore you believe we lack imagination and creativity. Some of the most creative people in the world are atheists. I have my creative outlets, and quite frankly it takes more imagination and creativity to face reality than is does to believe anything you wish. I have no more time for you. Goodbye.
However, that brings up another observation... you and the other think alikes tend to lack any hint of imagination or creativity in your thought.Creative thinking and Critical thinking are very different. It would be counterproductive to be "creative" while engaged in critical thinking.
Quoting M.A.
Creative thinking and Critical thinking are very different. It would be counterproductive to be “creative" while engaged in critical thinking.Sorry, M.A., but that is dead wrong. Creative thinking is going beyond the boundaries of present awareness, not engaging in fantasy. Critical thinking helps one guide one’s thinking along new, unexplored paths while preventing one from falling into the swamp of fairytales.
Occam
Quoting M.A.I disagree. Creative thinking means being heavily influenced by imagination, while creative thinking means analyzing information.Creative thinking and Critical thinking are very different. It would be counterproductive to be “creative" while engaged in critical thinking.Sorry, M.A., but that is dead wrong. Creative thinking is going beyond the boundaries of present awareness, not engaging in fantasy. Critical thinking helps one guide one's thinking along new, unexplored paths while preventing one from falling into the swamp of fairytales. Occam
Creative thinking means being heavily influenced by imagination, while creative thinking means analyzing information.Theory building in science starts with being creative, and therefore it is heavily influenced by imagination. Afterwards comes the hard work. And creative thinking is synthesizing information.
If two of us come up with a completely new approach to solving an intractable mathematical problem and present our papers, each will initially be judged as creative. However, when the methods are tested and the first works, but the second doesn’t, the first is still considered creative while the second is seen as a fairytale generated by imagination.
Creative thinking is putting together the real world in new and unexpected ways. Imagination has nothing to do with the reality base required.
BTW, I think M.A. meant “critical", not “creative" in the last part of his last sentence of post #17.
Occam