h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I stopped watching the programme fairly shortly into it. I don't like seeing confidence tricksters taking advantage of vulnerable people.

Well if they are confidence tricksters you're absolutely right.
Have nothing to do with them whatsoever and don't go knocking any glasses around packs of cards either.

That can be extremely dangerous.

But is there a reason to believe they are all faking it? I´d say a number of them are "genuine", and don´t feel they should be punished. But for the rest, I don´t think "giving hope" should be an excuse to avoid charges of fraud.

There's nothing wrong with ouija boards: it's all piffle so a few drunk teenagers ain't gonna' raise the dead: there ain't no raisable dead in the first place.

(yep, I was once one of those drunk teenagers!)

Do you *really* think that they believe they're genuine? I haven't seen too many of them step up for the Randi test...

Although I suppose that's because they wouldn't want to cheapen themselves.

Some of them are genuine. Some of them are not.
I wouldn't bother watching them on TV.

Most genuine spiritual healers charge very little, if anything at all, they are more likely to ask for a donation to whichever cause they support. Unless, of course, they are strapped for cash and they may ask you to buy them a drink or a meal or something like that

Genuine spiritual healers?

How would you design a foolproof test to show you can communicate with the dead? It´s not as obvious as bending spoons.

There is no such thing as a genuine spiritual healer. There might be spiritual healers who *think* they are genuine, but I doubt they would be able to withstand a scientific trial of their abilities (but I'd be happy to see evidence that proves me wrong).

Yeh... Surely the whole point is that there cannot, be by vertue of what is being claimed, be any genuine 'spiritual' healers/clarvoiants et all... Don't most people stop believing in pixies at the end of the garden, the tooth fairly and all that stuff when they're about 8?

How would you design a foolproof test to show you can communicate with the dead?

How do you design foolproof test to show you can communicate with a brick?

You can't. The dead are wormfood and a brick is a brick. Communication with either isn't on the cards.

Sheesh Mug, you´re just being stubborn now. My point is how can a medium let themselves be tested, if you cannot make a proper test?

But surely a medium could be tested on their ability to accurately describe a set amount of personal details about a percentage of volunteers when compared to someone who is open about their techniques...



...yes, OK, I'm thinking Derren Brown.

Dead or living volunteers? I just think it would be rather difficult to make a test that would be conclusive either way, seeing as if ghosts are real they might not necessarily want to do parlour tricks.

2legs: People tend to stop believing in those things because they are told they are childish ideas. Not because they start thinking critically.

Makes no difference.

If people are happy to go to a spiritual healer and it makes them feel better about having been in touch with their loved ones I can't see that that is a problem.

You all need to get a life!

But a spiritual healer doesn´t put you in touch with your loved ones. What they do is something more substantial, and so it should be easier to test. And they seem to always fail.

I can think of an easy test right now. Just pick up a telephone directory, pick some 20 names at random. Get the so called medium to give you some *definite* info about any dead people associated with that person's name, like names, dates of death, precise illnesses etc. Then phone the people to check the facts. I can absolutely guarentee that none of them will be able to do it

'If people are happy to go to a spiritual healer and it makes them feel better about having been in touch with their loved ones I can't see that that is a problem.'

But they haven't been in touch with their loved ones (their loved ones are dead) and someone has made money out of them. I see that as a problem.

What if a doctor handed out placebos, which made people feel better. How would you feel about that?

Mug: you remind me of that guy who said stones can´t fall out of the sky, because there are no stones in the sky.

I think that would be wrong. A doctor should deal in the truth. Placebos might seem nice in the short term but they won't cure an ailment.

Of course, that's not completely black and white: a beta blocker prescription that turns out to be a placebo could do some good, but the doctor could easily prescribe half doses and retain some integrity.