Is physical mediumship fraudulent?

Rather than admit these things, and proceed in a constructive manner, it seems like you would rather ignore them, and continue to flit around throwing up 100 year old pictures and make: insubstantial, irrelevant, easily controvertible, and just plain erroneous statements as if they are substantial arguments.

To your point- 
Are there some (even many) who don't have the ability to perform these feats and are faking it? Of course there are. But that's the easy part. Telling the difference is, of course, the hard part. 

Are there ANY who can do these things? That of course is the big question. 

I'm thinking that if you can't come up with something better than 100 year old pictures of long dead magicians with invisible strings you are screwed. 

Isn't it possible for you to step it up and talk about modern day events and evidence and methods? 

Unfortunately, even if it is, I'm afraid it will be difficult to make an irrefutable case on either side of the argument. Which of course is why, after going on 200 years of arguing about this stuff, we are still where we began.

Jkmac the reason I am citing old pictures is because physical mediumship is really a historical matter. A thing of the past. Most physical mediums had stopped operating by the late 1940s. The majority of physical mediums were operating around 1880-1940.

I also cite old pictures because they are in the public domain and out of copyright. I am not aware of many modern physical mediumship pictures but even I found some they under copyright so cannot be used. There are only a handful of modern physical mediums, and these are quite boring compared to the older ones. Why would I be talking about modern days events and evidence in this thread? This is a historical thread that deals with physical mediumship.

There were two proponents of physical mediumship on this thread near the beginning. Jim Smith has refused to acknowledge or correct errors on his website and has not posted here again and pssst says he is not talking to those who are biased against the subject. As there are no proponents commenting I am just putting in things that might be of interest to people.

What I do find interesting is that Stanisława Tomczyk a blatant fraud is still defended in modern parapsychological publications as a genuine medium (see the Handbook of Parapsychology).

Jkmac the reason I am citing old pictures is because physical mediumship is really a historical matter. A thing of the past. Most physical mediums had stopped operating by the late 1940s. The majority of physical mediums were operating around 1880-1940.

I also cite old pictures because they are in the public domain and out of copyright. I am not aware of many modern physical mediumship pictures but even I found some they under copyright so cannot be used. There are only a handful of modern physical mediums, and these are quite boring compared to the older ones. Why would I be talking about modern days events and evidence in this thread? This is a historical thread that deals with physical mediumship.

There were two proponents of physical mediumship on this thread near the beginning. Jim Smith has refused to acknowledge or correct errors on his website and has not posted here again and pssst says he is not talking to those who are biased against the subject. As there are no proponents commenting I am just putting in things that might be of interest to people.

What I do find interesting is that Stanisława Tomczyk a blatant fraud is still defended in modern parapsychological publications as a genuine medium (see the Handbook of Parapsychology).

Hmm. Thing of the past? I'd say not so much.

There may just be a lot more of these folks practicing today than you think. And there are photos and lots of video to see. 

I'm seeing a PM later this week as a matter of fact. 

Also- I didn't realize this was particularly a "historical" thread. Did I miss that part?

In terms of not responding, I think it was you that I asked something like: what would you expect a person being forced through the air to look like, and why was the picture not in alignment with those expectations? Or maybe that was a different person I asked? In any case,, the person making those comments seemed quite sure the man was not being acted on by a force other than his own,,, but I can't for the life of me understand how one could draw that conclusion from the photos I saw. And no answer.

To your point- 
Are there some (even many) who don't have the ability to perform these feats and are faking it? Of course there are. But that's the easy part. Telling the difference is, of course, the hard part. 

It depends upon the level of expertise of the observer. I sat once with Gary Mannion, promised never to return. Bad ju-ju. Several ppl could see that light from iridescent objects would occasionally be blocked. Mannion's cable ties were applied to his mid-forearm not wrists leaving slack to remove his arms from. And on and on and on.

Note the left side of this night vision camera movie, Mannion has slipped his cable ties (which were applied by an associate not a sitter control), lifts his tent-cabinet, proceeds to pick up the trumpet...

Gary Mannion - Fraud

[Ninshub]

It depends upon the level of expertise of the observer. I sat once with Gary Mannion, promised never to return. Bad ju-ju. Several ppl could see that light from iridescent objects would occasionally be blocked. Mannion's cable ties were applied to his mid-forearm not wrists leaving slack to remove his arms from. And on and on and on.

Note the left side of this night vision camera movie, Mannion has slipped his cable ties (which were applied by an associate not a sitter control), lifts his tent-cabinet, proceeds to pick up the trumpet...

Gary Mannion - Fraud

Btw, the Mannion case had been discussed on Skeptiko:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/fo...post-93741
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/sp...nces.3307/

Btw, the Mannion case had been discussed on Skeptiko:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/fo...post-93741
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/sp...nces.3307/

Yes. Disgraceful.

[Ninshub]

Psiclops had linked this interesting video by physical medium Scott Milligan, some time before the event, criticizing the recent trends in the various forms of mediumship.
https://www.facebook.com/scott.milligan....171088623/

EDIT: A skeptic with an open mind and not ideologically bound, listening to Scott criticizing most instances of ectoplasm and a lot of current physical mediumship and his genuine concern with the current art of mediumship, should be able to tell this guy is clearly not a fraud, so that we can appraise the question "is (all) physical mediumship fraudulent?" as nonsense.

Psiclops had linked this interesting video by physical medium Scott Milligan, some time before the event, criticizing the recent trends in the various forms of mediumship.
https://www.facebook.com/scott.milligan....171088623/

EDIT: A skeptic with an open mind and not ideologically bound, listening to Scott criticizing most instances of ectoplasm and a lot of current physical mediumship and his genuine concern with the current art of mediumship, should be able to tell this guy is clearly not a fraud, so that we can appraise the question "is (all) physical mediumship fraudulent?" as nonsense.

Scott is going on about Warren Caylor ("water to wine" inference; Caylor puts a bowl of water below is chair b/c spirit told him they wanted to experiment making this change), note how he goes on about "PM isn't what he learned, what he thinks it should be.

He needs to grow up, this regurgitation is tied directly to Gary Mannion's fraud and he paints a broad brush over PM, a highly biased one.

Milligan is the only modern PM (is he?) that refuses to sit with other PMs. Muegge has, Caylor has, Thompson has. heh. Glass houses...

[Ninshub]

Fair point about the broad brush.

Hm. Well all those currently saying they practice physical mediumship have the opportunity to demonstrate the truth of what they're saying, to recognised authorities, in controlled conditions. Let's see it. Until then their words don't carry much weight for me, neither do imprecise statements from people whose bona fides cannot be verified.

Psiclops had linked this interesting video by physical medium Scott Milligan, some time before the event, criticizing the recent trends in the various forms of mediumship.
https://www.facebook.com/scott.milligan....171088623/

EDIT: A skeptic with an open mind and not ideologically bound, listening to Scott criticizing most instances of ectoplasm and a lot of current physical mediumship and his genuine concern with the current art of mediumship, should be able to tell this guy is clearly not a fraud, so that we can appraise the question "is (all) physical mediumship fraudulent?" as nonsense.

Just because Scott might have criticized ectoplasm or other spiritualist mediums does not mean he is genuine. Daniel Dunglas Home was a fraudulent medium but wrote an an entire book attacking other mediums as fraudulent such as the Eddy Brothers. This is a very clever tactic to fool people.

But can you really be this naive? You listen to a Facebook conversation with the medium now you are convinced he is not a fraud? Every single physical medium investigated in the past was proven to be a fraud. I am not aware if Scott Milligan has been tested, but unlikely he is any different than the frauds he criticizes.