Illusionists

Anyhow, the point is that the claims made by illusionists and mentalists rarely - if ever - live up to some of the outstanding examples of reported psi activity. I'm thinking of Derren Brown...

It's difficult to believe that's really cold reading, isn't it? Particularly the name.

Some of Wikipedia's comments on Brown are interesting:

In a Daily Telegraph article published in 2003 Simon Singh criticised Brown's early TV appearances, arguing that he presented standard magic and mentalism effects—such as the classic ten-card poker deal trick—as genuine psychological manipulation.[58] On Brown's television and live shows he often appears to show the audience how a particular effect was created—claiming to use techniques such as subliminal suggestion, hypnosis, and body language reading. Singh's suggestion is that these explanations are dishonest. Furthermore, Singh took exception to the programme's website being categorised under Channel 4's "Science" section. The mini-site was moved to "Entertainment" for later series.

In an October 2010 interview, Brown conceded that Singh may have had a point, explaining that at the start of his television career "I was overstating the case, overstating my skills. I thought there'll only be one show, there'll never be a repeat, so I might as well go for it."[59] In his book Tricks of the Mind, Brown writes,

I am often dishonest in my techniques, but always honest about my dishonesty. As I say in each show, 'I mix magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship'. I happily admit cheating, as it's all part of the game. I hope some of the fun for the viewer comes from not knowing what's real and what isn't. I am an entertainer first and foremost, and I am careful not to cross any moral line that would take me into manipulating people's real-life decisions or belief systems.

Suppose he was cheating, and that was done by collusion ...

It's difficult to believe that's really cold reading, isn't it? Particularly the name.

Some of Wikipedia's comments on Brown are interesting:

In a Daily Telegraph article published in 2003 Simon Singh criticised Brown's early TV appearances, arguing that he presented standard magic and mentalism effects—such as the classic ten-card poker deal trick—as genuine psychological manipulation.[58] On Brown's television and live shows he often appears to show the audience how a particular effect was created—claiming to use techniques such as subliminal suggestion, hypnosis, and body language reading. Singh's suggestion is that these explanations are dishonest. Furthermore, Singh took exception to the programme's website being categorised under Channel 4's "Science" section. The mini-site was moved to "Entertainment" for later series.

In an October 2010 interview, Brown conceded that Singh may have had a point, explaining that at the start of his television career "I was overstating the case, overstating my skills. I thought there'll only be one show, there'll never be a repeat, so I might as well go for it."[59] In his book Tricks of the Mind, Brown writes,

I am often dishonest in my techniques, but always honest about my dishonesty. As I say in each show, 'I mix magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship'. I happily admit cheating, as it's all part of the game. I hope some of the fun for the viewer comes from not knowing what's real and what isn't. I am an entertainer first and foremost, and I am careful not to cross any moral line that would take me into manipulating people's real-life decisions or belief systems.

Suppose he was cheating, and that was done by collusion ...

I was responding to Kam who said that Derren Brown's feats weren't up there with the best "real psi" examples. Derren has been adamant that stooges are never used and has never been 'caught out' in that regard. I don't think he used the term 'cold reading' either, although I admit the youtube poster has used that term.

I was responding to Kam who said that Derren Brown's feats weren't up there with the best "real psi" examples. Derren has been adamant that stooges are never used and has never been 'caught out' in that regard. I don't think he used the term 'cold reading' either, although I admit the youtube poster has used that term.

He said it was "a fraudulent technique used by mediums in the Victorian times". Admittedly Victorian mediums sometimes used collusion too, so perhaps he was indulging in a bit of misdirection! I'm not sure what other fraudulent possibilities there are, unless (despite the impression given by the clip) they had really been asked to think of the person earlier, and there had been an opportunity to eavesdrop as they discussed their choices.

But I don't believe he received sufficient information on camera to come up with Laura/Nora/Noreen when Nora was the right answer.

The point is that if it was some other kind of fraud, then your comparison of him with outstanding psychics comes very close to what berkelon said sceptics never did. For example, the people who investigated Leonora Piper often took very stringent precautions to prevent any possibility of information being obtained from her sitters by normal means.

I watched this episode and even I was impressed at the time. The truth came out later though ...

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2003/o....channel41

Frankly, I don't know whether he's just a very skillful illusionist or there really is something funny going on. And frankly, I don't really care much either way. It just distracts from the amazingness of everyday things such as the phenomena of the living world.

I understand from whence thy comes. 

For instance, the circumference of a planet divided into the speed of light will give the cycles per second in the frequency of the world. Magic? Not at all. Was Tesla a magician? Not at all.

Yet, the natural order of things is not magical, it is normal.