Cedric Pakora: Extreme Flatulence

[Glaswegian]

Book Review


Derek Acorah: Extreme Psychic

In the introduction to this preposterous book Derek Acorah makes the following claim about his 'development' as a 'spirit medium':

"Once I would go on an investigation and merely talk about the energies I was picking up and the spirit entities present, but now I have progressed to channelling those spirit energies."

Anyone who is aware of Derek Acorah's exposure as a fraudulent medium on the Most Haunted television show must regard the above claim with utter derision. For those of you who are unaware of Acorah's ignominious unmasking on that ludicrous show please allow me to enlighten you...

The resident parapsychologist on the Most Haunted show had long suspected Acorah of being a phony medium. In order to demonstrate this he fed Acorah the names of two fictitious spirit entities (viz. 'Rik Eedles' and 'Kreed Kafer') along with some fake biographical details relating to each entity. Acorah swallowed the bait and proceeded to act out (i.e., 'channel') the personalities of the non-existent entities in front of the Most Haunted television audience.

As you've probably guessed, the names of the two fictitious spirit entities - 'Rik Eedles' and 'Kreed Kafer' - were anagrams concocted by the parapsychologist. When rearranged they read as follows:

Rik Eedles (Derek Lies)

Kreed Kafer (Derek Faker)

You would think that anyone with half a brain would have saw those two sucker punches coming. But not Acorah. And not even his alleged spirit guide 'Sam'. Acorah, having been revealed as a fraud in such a clear and unambiguous way, was ejected from the Most Haunted show.

Therefore the question we must ask ourselves is this: Given that Derek Acorah is a fraudulent medium, and demonstrably so, why should we believe anything he writes in his books concerning the 'paranormal'?

[Clodhopper]

Someone is publishing him. They clearly think they're going to make a lot of money. Go figure....(I can't).

I share your indignation.

[gmc]

Wishful thinking gets in the way of reason and is cynically abused-or derek ocorah is deluding himself.



YouTube - Derren Brown Interview (1/6) - Richard Dawkins

Can't say I've ever bothered really watching most haunted, not that I don't think there might be something going on we don't understand yet. Scariest place I've ever been in is Mary King's Close in edinburgh but I couldn't tell you why.

[Glaswegian]

Clodhopper;1290583 wrote: Someone is publishing him. They clearly think they're going to make a lot of money.
And they will, Clodhopper.

Publishers of books like Extreme Psychic know very well that they will be richly rewarded for their efforts. For example, you only have to visit any large bookshop to see that books on the Paranormal, the Supernatural, the Occult, the New Age and so on greatly outnumber those devoted to serious subjects like Science and Philosophy. What interests me is why the former sell so well, why are so many people willing to pay for this kind of pap and swallow it so greedily? One answer to this question was provided by Schopenhauer when he said:

'He who writes for fools always finds a large public.'

[Ahso!]

Glaswegian;1290683 wrote: And they will, Clodhopper.

Publishers of books like Extreme Psychic know very well that they will be richly rewarded for their efforts. For example, you only have to visit any large bookshop to see that books on the Paranormal, the Supernatural, the Occult, the New Age and so on greatly outnumber those devoted to serious subjects like Science and Philosophy. What interests me is why the former sell so well, why are so many people willing to pay for this kind of pap and swallow it so greedily? One answer to this question was provided by Schopenhauer when he said:

'He who writes for fools always finds a large public.'Perhaps people are interested in the "mystery" of existence? Paranormal ideas are not far removed from religion, if at all.

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1290628 wrote: Scariest place I've ever been in is Mary King's Close in edinburgh but I couldn't tell you why.
Was your trepidation due to Mary's insistence on removing her false teeth before she French-kissed you, gmc?

Your mention of Mary King's Close brings to mind a classic investigation of an alleged 'haunted location' which I'm sure will be of interest to you. I'll try to set it down in a post later tonight.

[Snowfire]

"Mary loves Dick, Mary loves Dick" :yh_rotfl

I detestable charletons the lot of 'em. The woman in the US who appears regularly on the Montel Williams show is about as bad as it gets. The arrogance as she cons the vulnerable is disgusting. Montel Williams is an intelligent man. He ought to know better

[Betty Boop]

Derek has held my hand, he told me that I'd have four children and a long and happy marriage, oh, he said I'd live on an island amongst other things. He only got one thing right :rolleyes::D

[Glaswegian]

To gmc:

Glaswegian;1290705 wrote: Your mention of Mary King's Close brings to mind a classic investigation of an alleged 'haunted location' which I'm sure will be of interest to you.
The investigation I alluded to above, gmc, concerns Borley Rectory - once renowned as 'The Most Haunted House In England'. Perhaps you've heard about this place? If not then let me say a little about it. At Borley Rectory all sorts of 'paranormal' activity were allegedly on display - for example, ghostly apparitions, mysterious footsteps, raps and knocks, strange lights, strange odours, bell-ringing, materialisations of objects, disappearances of objects, sudden changes of temperature - in short, the usual stuff which tickles aficianados of the 'paranormal'.

In the 1930's Borley Rectory acquired its status as 'The Most Haunted House In England' largely due to an investigation carried out by Harry Price - a self-styled 'professional ghost-hunter'. Earlier I described Price's investigation as 'classic' but I was simply being sarcastic then: for it was only classic in the sense of being a masterpiece of self-deception, gullibility and downright fraud. Price's investigation has become notorious - arguably more notorious than even Borley Rectory - and no 'paranormal' investigator can hear of either without blushing to his toes.

There are plenty of websites that provide information about Price's investigation of Borley Rectory, and I'll be happy to discuss it with anyone who's interested. The best study to date of that investigation has been made by Gustav Jahoda in his remarkable book The Psychology Of Superstition. Jahoda's book is a classic of psychological analysis - yes, classic in the true sense of the word - and I strongly recommend it, especially to you, gmc, for it will throw much light on why you were scared that time in Mary King's Close. Unnecessarily scared, that is.

[Glaswegian]

Snowfire;1290713 wrote: The woman in the US who appears regularly on the Montel Williams show is about as bad as it gets.
You must mean Sylvia Browne.

Snowfire: If you really want to know how bad it gets then visit the website Stop Sylvia Browne. You cannot imagine....

[gmc]

Glaswegian;1290893 wrote: To gmc:

The investigation I alluded to above, gmc, concerns Borley Rectory - once renowned as 'The Most Haunted House In England'. Perhaps you've heard about this place? If not then let me say a little about it. At Borley Rectory all sorts of 'paranormal' activity were allegedly on display - for example, ghostly apparitions, mysterious footsteps, raps and knocks, strange lights, strange odours, bell-ringing, materialisations of objects, disappearances of objects, sudden changes of temperature - in short, the usual stuff which tickles aficianados of the 'paranormal'.

In the 1930's Borley Rectory acquired its status as 'The Most Haunted House In England' largely due to an investigation carried out by Harry Price - a self-styled 'professional ghost-hunter'. Earlier I described Price's investigation as 'classic' but I was simply being sarcastic then: for it was only classic in the sense of being a masterpiece of self-deception, gullibility and downright fraud. Price's investigation has become notorious - arguably more notorious than even Borley Rectory - and no 'paranormal' investigator can hear of either without blushing to his toes.

There are plenty of websites that provide information about Price's investigation of Borley Rectory, and I'll be happy to discuss it with anyone who's interested. The best study to date of that investigation has been made by Gustav Jahoda in his remarkable book The Psychology Of Superstition. Jahoda's book is a classic of psychological analysis - yes, classic in the true sense of the word - and I strongly recommend it, especially to you, gmc, for it will throw much light on why you were scared that time in Mary King's Close. Unnecessarily scared, that is.


I've seen a couple of investigations in to mary king's close-theories ranging from gases from the old nor loch to resonant frequencies in the rocks. It's one place I've found where the fear is real regardless of the likely explanation. Actually I'd spend a night there but I wouldn't do it on my own.

Maybe one day we'll have an explanation-there are a few places I've been on the hills that feel magical but maybe that's the celt in me. Don,t believe in ghosties and the second sight and things but you never know.

[Glaswegian]

Ahso!;1290685 wrote: Perhaps people are interested in the "mystery" of existence?
Indeed they are, Ahso! However, the Paranormal, the Supernatural, the Occult, etc. offer no solution to the mystery of existence. As a route to understanding the mystery of existence they are dead-ends. They are - to use a conjuring term - forms of misdirection.

Ahso! wrote: Paranormal ideas are not far removed from religion, if at all.
I strongly agree. I would say that 'paranormal' ideas are of the same piece as 'religious' ideas. That is, both sets are equally ridiculous and have no basis in reality. For example, what is the metaphysical difference between a 'poltergeist' and the 'Holy Ghost'? Forgive me. I know. It's like asking what is the metaphysical difference between an elf and a genie.

[Snowfire]

Glaswegian;1290900 wrote: You must mean Sylvia Browne.

Snowfire: If you really want to know how bad it gets then visit the website Stop Sylvia Browne. You cannot imagine....


I bet I can. James Randi has been one of her biggest critics. He has challenged her constantly to stand up to scientific scrutiny. Of course, there is no way she can

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1290628 wrote: Wishful thinking gets in the way of reason
You're quite right. Wishful thinking does get in the way of reason. But there are many other psychological processes which do so as well, and some of them run very deep. For the moment, though, I'd like to focus on wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking is evident in so many strange beliefs associated with the Paranormal, the Supernatural, the Occult, the New Age and, of course, Religion that one is spoiled for choice. Here's my pick amongst them for today - 'Past Lives'.

As you know, belief in past lives or reincarnation is integral to many Eastern religions and I don't think we need to look much further than the influence of culture and upbringing to account for this belief as it manifests itself in, say, Buddhist lands. What interests me is how this belief manifests itself in the West - specifically, in the context of what is called 'Past Life Regression' therapy. (Generally, a procedure wherein individuals allegedly recall past lives under the direction of a hypnotherapist.)

One of the things which arouses my suspicion when I read about reports of past lives recalled under hypnotic regression is how extraordinary and dramatic they are. The lives recalled are rarely ever boring, insignificant or mundane. No. They are always so gripping! Thus, in one's past life one was a high priest in Ancient Egypt; or a lady in waiting to Mary Queen of Scots; or a soldier killed at the Battle of Little Bighorn; or an Abyssinian princess; or one of the murdered Romanovs; or a mutineer on the Bounty; or an innocent 'witch' burned by the Inquisition; etc., etc., etc.

Why is it that none of the individuals who undergo past life regression therapy ever claim to have lived a previous existence, say, as a pimp or a miser or a eunuch or a cess pit attendant or a village idiot or a pervert or to have shovelled dung on the streets of Atlantis? I suppose it just wouldn't be comforting enough to have lived out one of those kinds of past lives, it just wouldn't provide one with the necessary amount of psychological compensation to make up for the general dullness and unsatisfactoriness of one's present llife.

As I said at the outset, gmc, you are right. Wishful thinking does get in the way of reason. But more than this. It mugs it. Overpowers it. Then narcissism does the rest.

[Glaswegian]

Snowfire;1291014 wrote: I bet I can. James Randi has been one of her biggest critics. He has challenged her constantly to stand up to scientific scrutiny. Of course, there is no way she can


Apologies, Snowfire. When I read your earlier post I thought you were unsure of Browne's identity.

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1290924 wrote: It's one place I've found where the fear is real regardless of the likely explanation.
I'm interested to know why you discount naturalistic explanations of the fear you experienced in Mary King's Close, gmc? For example, you must be aware of the powerful role which context plays in influencing our emotions and perceptions. You must also be aware that prior knowledge or expectation about a place exert an equally powerful influence on how we experience it. What makes you rule out natural factors like these as possible explanations of your fear?

[Snowfire]

Glaswegian;1291229 wrote: Apologies, Snowfire. When I read your earlier post I thought you were unsure of Browne's identity.


No problem. Her nonchalant, lofty arrogance is imprinted on my brain. Its her name I couldnt recall

[gmc]

Glaswegian;1291271 wrote: I'm interested to know why you discount naturalistic explanations of the fear you experienced in Mary King's Close, gmc? For example, you must be aware of the powerful role which context plays in influencing our emotions and perceptions. You must also be aware that prior knowledge or expectation about a place exert an equally powerful influence on how we experience it. What makes you rule out natural factors like these as possible explanations of your fear?


I'm not discounting them. I was just mentioning that the sense of fear on that occasion was no less real even knowing what the naturalistic explanations might be. I would love to spend a night there-I just wouldn't do it on my own. By way of contrast I've also seen Grey Man of Ben Macdhui, which since I knew what caused it, was fascinating rather than frightening. The walking companion with me at the time also knew what it was and wasn't bothered by it-on the other hand the white out had him completely freaking out and I had to stop him from running blindly off the hill- he just couldn't handle it despite knowing perfectly well the scientific explanation and that his behaviour was stupid and likely to get him killed, inconsiderate as well since he had the car keys.

[Snowfire]

Glaswegian;1291271 wrote: I'm interested to know why you discount naturalistic explanations of the fear you experienced in Mary King's Close, gmc? For example, you must be aware of the powerful role which context plays in influencing our emotions and perceptions. You must also be aware that prior knowledge or expectation about a place exert an equally powerful influence on how we experience it. What makes you rule out natural factors like these as possible explanations of your fear?


Thats interesting because my sister-in-law insists there is no such thing as ghosts but when I asked her whether she would spend the night alone in a haunted house said "You must be joking. I'd never do that "

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1291364 wrote: I'm not discounting them. I was just mentioning that the sense of fear on that occasion was no less real even knowing what the naturalistic explanations might be. I would love to spend a night there-I just wouldn't do it on my own. By way of contrast I've also seen Grey Man of Ben Macdhui, which since I knew what caused it, was fascinating rather than frightening. The walking companion with me at the time also knew what it was and wasn't bothered by it-on the other hand the white out had him completely freaking out and I had to stop him from running blindly off the hill- he just couldn't handle it despite knowing perfectly well the scientific explanation and that his behaviour was stupid and likely to get him killed, inconsiderate as well since he had the car keys.
Thanks for posting this. I'd never heard of 'The Grey Man Of Ben MacDhui' until I read your post. I've just done a quick Wiki search on The Grey Man and it would seem that Scotland has its own version of the Bigfoot legend. Amazing! Well, okay: I'd heard stories of such a creature being regularly sighted at Ibrox stadium but I was always sure that there was a rational explanation for them. But for this kind of creature to be seen in the Cairngorms...Far out!

gmc wrote: By way of contrast I've also seen Grey Man of Ben Macdhui, which since I knew what caused it, was fascinating rather than frightening.
I'm intrigued. What was it that you saw?

[Clodhopper]

The walking companion with me at the time also knew what it was and wasn't bothered by it-on the other hand the white out had him completely freaking out and I had to stop him from running blindly off the hill- he just couldn't handle it despite knowing perfectly well the scientific explanation and that his behaviour was stupid and likely to get him killed, inconsiderate as well since he had the car keys.


Isn't that - quite literally - Panic? ie the fear of the wild? Ooooh man. I get it if I step into the woods at night.

[Glaswegian]

Snowfire;1291373 wrote: Thats interesting because my sister-in-law insists there is no such thing as ghosts but when I asked her whether she would spend the night alone in a haunted house said "You must be joking. I'd never do that "
This seems to be a case of irrational fear on your sister-in-law's part, doesn't it? She realises that there is no such thing as ghosts but, in spite of this knowledge, the prospect of spending a night alone in a 'haunted house' still frightens her. Clearly, since the fear does not lie in her conscious mind it must originate somewhere in her unconscious.

There are a wide range of fears that can be labelled as 'irrational': for example, phobias, free-floating anxiety, panic atttacks, existential angst, nameless dread. I think it is precisely because fears of this kind have an unconscious basis that we experience them as extremely unpleasant and alarming. They seem to be immune to reason and to lie outside our control. The following is an account of irrational fear taking hold of an individual. From the viewpoint of the individual concerned, what makes the fear especially horrible is that it seems to come out of nowhere. The account is given by Henry James, Sr., the father of the renowned psychologist William James.

'One day towards the close of May, having eaten a comfortable dinner, I remained sitting at the table after the family had dispersed, idly gazing into the embers of the grate, thinking of nothing and feeling only the exhilaration incident to a good digestion, when suddenly - in a lightning flash, as it were - fear came upon me, and trembling made all my bones to shake. To all appearances it was a perfectly insane and abject terror without ostensible cause, and only to be accounted for, to my perplexed imagination, by some damned shape, squatting invisible to me within the precincts of the room, and raying out from his fetid personality influences fatal to life. The thing had not lasted ten seconds before I felt myself a wreck, that is, reduced from a state of firm, vigorous, joyful manhood to one of almost helpless infancy. I felt the greatest desire to shout for help to my wife...but by an immense effort I controlled these frenzied impulses and determined not to budge...until I had recovered my self-possession. This purpose I held to for a good hour...beat upon meanwhile by an ever-growing tempest of doubt, anxiety and despair.'

[gmc]

Glaswegian;1291426 wrote: Thanks for posting this. I'd never heard of 'The Grey Man Of Ben MacDhui' until I read your post. I've just done a quick Wiki search on The Grey Man and it would seem that Scotland has its own version of the Bigfoot legend. Amazing! Well, okay: I'd heard stories of such a creature being regularly sighted at Ibrox stadium but I was always sure that there was a rational explanation for them. But for this kind of creature to be seen in the Cairngorms...Far out!

I'm intrigued. What was it that you saw?


Not that nonsense about some strange creature. It's a natural phenomenon caused by your own shadow being reflected in a white out.

The Grey Man of Ben Macdhui | Mysterious Britain & Ireland

A more reasonable explanation for some of the sightings of huge figures in the mist could be [QUOTE]phenomena known as the Brocken spectre, named after the German mountains where the effect was first discovered. An early account of such an event occurs in 'In the Shadow of Cairngorm' by The Rev. W. Forsyth,

'Sir Thomas Dick Lauder describes such an appearance ("Edinburgh New Philosophic Journal, 1831.") "On descending from the top (of Ben Mac Dhui) at about half-past three P.M., an interesting optical appearance presented itself to our view. We had turned towards the east, and the sun shone on our backs, when we saw a very bright rainbow described on the mist before us. The bow, of beautifully distinct prismatic colours, formed about two-thirds of a circle, the extremities of which appeared to rest on the lower portion of the mountain. In the centre of this incomplete circle there was described a luminous disc, surrounded by the prismatic colours displayed in concentric rings. On the disc itself, each of the party (three in number), as they stood about fifty yards apart, saw his own figure most distinctly delineated, although those of the other two were invisible to him. The representation appeared of the natural size, and the outline of the whole person of the spectator was most correctly portrayed. To prove that the shadow seen by each individual was that of himself, we resorted to various gestures, such as waving our hats, flapping our plaids, &c., all which motions were exactly followed by the airy figure.'






Spooky if you don't realise what it is. Didn't see a rainbow but it was obviously our shadows. Seen it elsewhere as well, macdui is a plateau so the shadow is being cast a long way and seems bigger.

posted by clodhopper

Isn't that - quite literally - Panic? ie the fear of the wild? Ooooh man. I get it if I step into the woods at night.


It was blind panic. In a whiteout in winter you lose all visual orientation, there is an change in air pressure-it feels oppressive-and absolute silence-you start hearing your own heartbeat pounding in your ears. You literally feel it closing in around you and while you can understand intellectually what it is some will still panic especially if you have never been caught in one before, and if your navigation is off it can be dangerous. It is perfectly possible to step off a cliff or a cornice in to nothing because you can't see the edge.

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1291551 wrote: Not that nonsense about some strange creature. It's a natural phenomenon caused by your own shadow being reflected in a white out.
So 'The Grey Man Of Ben MacDhui' is nothing more than a shadow. How disappointing! Because your earlier post was very atmospheric. When I read it Coleridge's famous verse from the Ancient Mariner sprang to mind...

Like one, that on a lonesome road

Doth walk in fear and dread,

And having once turned round walks on,

And turns no more his head;

Because he knows, a frightful fiend

Doth close behind him tread.