Sensing Murder
Poneke applies the blowtorch to the Dom Post’s front page free advertising for the charlatans:
It is thus deeply disappointing to see the Dominion Post giving a huge promotion to this hokum, with a front page splash on Friday claiming the police “have resorted to interviewing two television psychics in a desperate search for a new lead” into the suspected murder of Kaye Stewart, not seen since she went walking in Rimutaka Forest Park in 2005.
Reading this breathless, shoddy story (which took up two thirds of page one), it is apparent that it was Sensing Murder that approached the police offering information about Mrs Stewart, and then told the Dominion Post that the police had “interviewed” its “psychics” Kelvin Cruickshank and Deb Webber.
The story is nothing more than a front page, free advertisement for this shonky show, which is to feature an episode about Mrs Stewart on Tuesday night. One thing is certain, the show has not helped the police inquiry in any way …
The headline was very misleading. It made you think the Police has called in the psychics because they thought they could help.
I flayed Sensing Murder back in January, with a post about Christchurch man Tony Andrews offering $20,000 of his own money to any of the shows “psychics” if they could demonstrate in a simple test that they actually had psychic abilities. Naturally, neither the show nor its four “mediums” – who also include Sue Nicholson and Scott Russell Hill – have shown any interest in taking the test, because, I argued, they know they are perpetrating a cruel sham. “They have the psychic powers of tadpoles, and they know it,” I wrote then.
I’ll believe in such powers when they pass a controlled test such as the one above. But believing these charlatans have some sort of power because of Sensing Murder, is like believing David Copperfield really can cast magical spells because of his TV shiw.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
So how many murders have the scamming vultures solved so far ?
September 7th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
What I find more disturbing is the number of people who are prepared to accept AGW as irrefutable truth rather than a possibility that is presented as entertainment.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Pfffft. If these crooks had any real mystery-solving ability, they’d tell us what Winston did with the money. Goodness knows, no one who’s alive is going to tell us the truth, that much is obvious.
I share Poneke’s disgust at the DomPost’s “editorial standards”. IMHO one of the best pieces I ever wrote came from infiltrating a Spiritualist Church meeting and spending the entire time asking impertinent questions like “Where did I leave my car keys?” (okay, maybe you had to be there, but the responses were actually earnest if hopelessly incorrect), then writing up the answers. But the point is, I was trained by editors who would have had me flogged if I didn’t approach even the seemingly obvious with a healthy dose of journalistic skepticism, let alone claims of the paranormal.
Now, it seems, not only are journalists suckers for PR nonsense but so are their editors. Not that I’m complaining, but the journalist part of me is still somewhat taken aback when I read a media release I’ve written reproduced verbatim in a newspaper (and, as one was recently, under a reporter’s byline).
September 7th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
I’d like to bring some *cough* scientific rigour to this thread. One can do no better than quote our resident expert on “things paranormal”:
So, according to Philu, it’s case closed. Actually no.
Philu has just acknowledged there’s no evidence to support the Sensing Murder theory – just a (hazy) hallucinogenic feeling that Crimebusters(TM) is less about facts and more about warm fuzzy spirits. Of course, Philu could always provide clear, irrefutable evidence to support his case.
Next week we’ll be hearing from Casper the Friendly Ghost!
September 7th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
“PSYCHIC WINS LOTTO”
A headline you will never see.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
oh look..!..it’s the humourless stalking lawyer..!
nosty..!
(very strange..!..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 7th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Actually, Philu, stalking is like what you did to Rex Widerstrom – following him across multiple threads (for more than a week) and challenging him to an off-topic debate about marijuana and impotence.
Now back to this thread.
Your evidence that Sensing Murder is not an orchestrated conspiracy to defraud is…?
September 7th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
that crazy claim made by widerstrom..that he then couldn’t back up in any way..?
..and ran away from..?
..yeah..i remember that..
are you there rex..?
..any ‘evidence’ of your claim cannabis causes impotence..?
..eh..?
..and nosty..i decided a while ago not to take you at all seriously..
..with your lawyery word-games you so seem to enjoy..
..so..
..can i suggest you go and play with yourself..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz
September 7th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
So once again Philu exposes himself as all puff and no substance.
For the record, Rex actually did produce evidence, which Philu was apparently unable to rebut. But it’s funny that Philu can’t see the hypocrisy in accusing Rex of “running away” from a “crazy claim” (in Philu’s opinion), while at the same time refusing to substantiate his “crazy claim” (in my opinion) about Sensing Murder.
You think I’m going to take suggestions from you? That’s about as likely as you taking up my suggestion: get a job!
September 7th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Nomestradamus, hey with this site apparently having had a Nomendectomy, could it be time to change your handle to philubuster or something?
September 7th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Getstaffed:
Nomendectomy – priceless!
I suppose there’s another possibility (based on Labour’s flagship Working for Families policy): “Working for Philu”. Or maybe “Philu For Work”. But that would be stalking
Anyway, does anyone care to defend Sensing Murder?
September 7th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
i think it’s more a case of the questioner..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 7th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I’ll tell you what, I would rather believe the Sensing Murder Psychics than believe a single word that the media spews out about WMD’s, Bin Ladden, Georgia etc…
September 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
I suspect some psychics are genuine, yes.
Over the course of the Sensing Murder series, the psychics appeared to come up with plenty of information that police said was known only to them.
Could it have all been faked? Yes. So could absolutely everything that’s presented as factual in which we were not personally involved.
But…
I wonder why every person involved in that production would want to risk being exposed as a fraud, given the number of conspiracy theorists who were bound to be baying for their blood.
It’s not like working on Forgotten Silver, where the hoax was made public and everyone went back to normal. Why would so many people want to take part in something so dishonest? Isn’t there enough honest film work out there?
I might be the world’s biggest sucker, but I found the psychics’ demeanour convincing.
What I find most interesting is the two different standards of proof you sceptics require, depending on whether you WANT to believe the claim or not.
People who cry fraud about the moon landings and 9/11 you quickly dismiss as loonies (or NZ First members). Yet you just as quickly cry fraud about Sensing Murder, with no greater justification.
That’s bias, not balance. It undermines the credibility of the right.
Let the slagging and negative karma and comparisons with philu begin!
September 7th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
John Ansell:
I’d invite you to read this Kiwiblog thread from last year.
It started out as a thread about a fraudulent psychic healer, and quickly turned into a discussion about Sensing Murder. In particular, I’d invite you to read the contributions from “Falafulu Fisi”, who (among other things) linked to this website:
The whole thing makes for a fascinating read – I’d be interested in your thoughts.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Also, how many of you sceptics went to church today?
A lot of conservatives who rubbish the paranormal eagerly embrace religion, based on nothing more than faith.
Is this not a contradiction?
I just think we’ve got to keep our minds a bit more open. That’s why I admire guys like Roger Douglas and Don Brash and Richard Prebble. These people were prepared to turn their backs on everything they believed and worked for once they realised it didn’t work. That’s called keeping an open mind.
To be credible truthseekers, don’t we have to admit the possibility that we don’t yet understand every dimension of existence, and not automatically scoff at those who claim to have had experiences we haven’t?
I’d love to see a credible blind test of the Sensing Murder psychics. All too often, though, such tests have been conducted from a biased perspective by journalists out to humiliate their subjects, and cynicism drips from every frame.
I don’t think I’d do my best work in those circumstances, would you?
But it would be great if someone with a truly open mind would conduct such a test, and Kelvin and co. would cooperate. That would rate through the roof too.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Nomestradamus: I’m not defending the psychics and would be glad to have their validity or otherwise proven, but that site’s longwinded and savage character assassination of Nigel Latta doesn’t augur well for neutrality. It has much in common with many political rationales I’ve read.
I think only a short, simple test would prove it one way or the other.
If it’s a truly fair scientific test, conducted without any ‘desired’ outcome by people with an open mind, then if the psychics still aren’t prepared to cooperate, I agree that would reflect poorly on them.
They owe it to their public – and ought to relish the chance – to prove their authenticity beyond reasonable doubt.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Keeping an open mind is key to everything in life. Unfortunately, when considering a proposition that forces abutment against one’s world view, most people assume the safest position, which is understandable.
It’s unfortunate since it closes your mind to alternatives. The roots of the ‘safe position’ lie in those emotions that create resistance to consider alternatives and unless you understand those emotions in yourself you’ll be forever bound to pick at the edges and never penetrate to the root.
It leads to irrational thinking such as seen, for example, in those lefties that profess Hulun’s position on Winston is reasonable.
Sometimes conservatives label such people as ‘useful idiots.’ Ever thought about looking in the mirror?
Personally, I try never to reach a conclusion, since once you do that, subconsciously you reject the evidence that doesn’t support it and hold fast to that which does. I have positions, but they are always open to change. I have found that the more I strive to keep those channels open, the better I become at predicting and understanding.
September 8th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Imagine how crap they must be at hide and seek.
September 8th, 2008 at 6:51 am
In my experience, the traits, manner and body language expressed by sensing murder psychics and other such people matches those of compulsive liars and people on the verge of an emotional crisis or psychological breakdown. Now that’s not to say that there may be some people out there who really can see into past events they weren’t involved with with accuracy. But there are more frauds out there than true real life examples and the problem is that any one fitting the above discription also thinks they’re suddenly psychic. Go back through the pasts of “famous” psychics and inspect their traumatic experiences. Is it really a co-incidence that they appear to displaying some kind of variation on post traumatic stress disorder?
As far as I can tell, the real examples of psychic ability require a certain amount of intelligence as well as feeling. In these cases, the prompts from the “spirits” are symbolic, seemingly unrelated events, that apparently happen outside of the person reading them – without attendant emotion. I do not believe the dead, or the great spirit in the sky, speaks in english to an on-screen medium or always uses emotion as a measure.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:37 am
I went to comment on a blog post at New Zealand Reality TV website last year (2007) on Sensing Murder and the blog owner/s posted my comment as a guess post (see link). Psychics can be rejected on philosophical ground/s alone. It can be rejected on the basis of the laws of physics. It can be rejected based on statistical evidence alone.
There are millions of psychic followers around the world, not because it works but because there are suckers everywhere.
Psychics who are genuinely believe their abilities are delusional, simple as that.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:24 am
“is like believing David Copperfield really can cast magical spells because of his TV show.”
He is a 20th level Mage. Of course he can cast spells.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I agree with you, Reid.
But Falufalu Fisu, how can you reject psychics on philosophical grounds alone? That’s saying, “I don’t believe because I don’t want to believe”. That’s Reid’s point. The paranormal obviously threatens your worldview and you don’t want a bar of it.
Similarly, socialists don’t believe the likes of ACT, not because it doesn’t make sense, but because it threatens their emotional belief in the power of the state.
And conservatives don’t believe in psychics because they’re brought up to believe in another brand of paranormality called God.
As for the laws of physics, have they not been updated at various times as new information comes along?
I think the only certainty in the world is that we cannot possibly exist.
(Well, how can we? Whatever created us must first have been created by something else, and so on, making it impossible for the first thing to have been created.)
I rather like the theory that God is a CD-ROM, with everything that’s ever going to happen having already happened. But who or what burned it?
How can we be sure of anything (except that Winston Peters is toast)?
September 8th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Falafulu Fisi, there is a flaw in your argument on the Reality TV site:
You say the psychics get their info from an “energy” source. The error is that you take them at their word that what they’re dealing with is “energy.” You have proven that what they claim to use is not energy governed by the laws of physics, but you have not proven that they are not using something else to get their info. Your scientific model is being used to disprove, not explore – which is bad science. Later you imply it is “spirit”, but you do not go looking for evidence of spirit. The argument is then one of technical terms. If they call it “paloomanga-doodoo” instead of energy, then what? Just because they don’t know the correct term for what they claim to use, it does no mean it doesn’t exist. Before man had a name for heat, did he deny it’s existence? Anyway, I’m not doing this to prove psychics are right, but to encourage a better argument that they are frauds, or to discover exactly what it is that they experience.
So if we use your implication that it is “spirit”, how do we prove it is spirit? What test is there for spiritual experience? Does spirit have a form that cannot be measured by physics? That would be the obvious suggestion, but it does not mean it can’t or won’t ever be measured. I have no idea how you go about measuring the occurance of spirit. It sounds like something theology is concerned with.
Making my own leap of logic, I may be asking you prove the existence of god by using science, which I doubt you can. Congratulations for proving what psychics claim to use is not energy as we know it.
My head is becoming cluttered with p’s, h’s, and y’s and s’.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Enjoyed the frying of Sensing Murder by Raybon Kan in this week’s SST and by Jermey Wells a few weeks ago on RNZ. The issue is not whether psychics and they fellow travellers have some validity – the issue is whether this show exploits victims and provides a platform for charlatans.
We should be laughing these guys off the screens – and the TVNZ execs who endorse them.
Exposing Graham Capill’s crime – and his hypocrisy – was not an attack on Christianity. Proving his crime did not disprove his religion – just how he was practicing it!!
The real question: if the Sensing Murder psychics were plumbers/car dealers/builders – what would Target/Consumer/Fair Go/Commerce Commision be saying/doing?
I think we should be subjecting these individuals to the ordinary tests of credibility and performance. That is far simpler (and more important) than the broader issues of spirituality and the “other world”.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:04 am
I reject psychics because they have never been able to demonstrate any ability under controlled test conditions.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:12 am
John Ansell said…
reject psychics on philosophical grounds alone?
From an objectivist point of view in philosophy the concept of infinity can’t materially exist. It is a useful tool in mathematical abstraction, but it cannot be applied to the physical world. A thing must have an identity, ie, A is A. You can’t have an entity that is both A and B simultaneously.
Now to psychic. Here is a simple thought experiment to be tested. Assemble a group/team of say 3 psychics per team of 5 teams from the general population. Disperse those 5 teams to different locations on the planet to do readings on the same supposedly dead person. Each team don’t know that there are other teams out there in different locations trying to talk to the same dead spirit. The coordinator of these different teams, must time that these groups start their reading at the same time, even they might be in different time zones but it is vital that they are being done simultaneously. It is easily demonstrable that these group will claim to talk to this same spirit simultaneously.
What does that implies? Well it implies that the spirit is everywhere at once, ie, not localized, but smeared itself out globally so that different parts of it appear to different teams at different locations simultaneously. Philosophically, the existence of such infinite everywhere at once, must be dismissed because the thing (A, B, C or whatever) or entity doesn’t possess an identity anymore. Anything that doesn’t have identity must be an imaginary object, ie, it doesn’t exist in the physical world that we observe. If those imaginary objects are being promoted as real, (in the sense of the physical universe and its known laws that we witnessed around us) by its proponents, ie, psychics and believers, then those individuals must be categorized as delusional.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:25 am
John Ansell said…
If they call it “paloomanga-doodoo” instead of energy, then what?
Whatever term that psychics choose to use, it is irrelevant, since the universe is made up of either mass or energy and these 2 entities are interchangeable via the Einstein equation: E = m*c^2 , ie, heat/radiation can be condensed and become mass, as well as mass can vaporize & become radiation (nuclear reaction). Anything that psychic claims to be outside these 2 entities (mass/energy) is hokum. This is the typical excuse that is used by psychics and its followers, saying that science can’t prove everything. Science can prove that psychics is bullshit, end of story, no ifs no buts.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:47 am
“Whatever term that psychics choose to use, it is irrelevant, since the universe is made up of either mass or energy…”
Ok, haha, time for disclaimers! Spill the beans falafulu fisi -why do you need to know that psychic ability is not possible? Are you an atheist? You can’t suggest the existence of spirit in one post, and know all the implications of that, and then deny that spirit exists because it cannot be found by physics. You suggested spirit – yes you. It’s a concept humans have struggled with since they first stood up. Explore for chrissake. I’m not interested in what you personally believe, nor do I want to tear your belief system down for fun on a rainy morning, but you can’t claim certainty using the method you are.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:01 am
goodgod said…
Explore for chrissake. I’m not interested in what you personally believe, nor do I want to tear your belief system down for fun on a rainy morning, but you can’t claim certainty using the method you are.
No, the method that I used is independent of me or other scientists whether I am here or not. It is independent of human existence. The method I used is the universal laws of the universe, it was here way before humans existed and they will still be here when we humans all long gone. The universal laws of the universe is built on conservation principles, for it to be falsified, then we accept that everything around us is not real, ie, your last post was just an illusion, you didn’t use a computer to post that message since the computer was just a figment of imagination, what you see if front of you is not real, just illusion, etc… See, if psychic claims is to be hold true then conservation laws is out the window because it contradicts those. These opposing views/concepts can’t be both true. Either conservation laws of the universe is bullshit where you can accept that everything around you is illusion or otherwise that psychic claims is bullshit. Which is your pick? Everything is illusion or psychic claims who can’t even spell the names of the dead people they claim to talk to? Something like this. I am talking to a spirit of person with a name starting with J… or perhaps Jim, John, Jane, blah, blah, … bullshit.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
are you a virgo..?..fisi..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 8th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Going by all the comments above it seems that only three or four of us watch and enjoy the programme.I’m a simple man and I do believe in the paranormal. I’ve also been a friend of the Detective frontman for over 30 years and know him to be of high integrity. It is one thing to be told (psychics) that a certain person committed the murder and how and an entirely different thing to establish a court case though. I would love to see them tackle the Crewe murders though.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Well said Baxter. There’s much to be said for simplicity.
September 8th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
The really scary thing about this is the number of believers there are out there. That’s the real reason the TV execs put this drivel on – it’s good for the ratings.
The age of enlightenment? – i think not!
September 9th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
so..did any of you watch the show tonight..?
feedback..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
September 9th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
And there’s one of them!
September 28th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Below is some feedback from Tony Andrews. What it shows is that he is very bias,
which he has already stated. From what I can see, his agenda is not to seek out information, but to crush
anything that disagrees with his and other skeptics understanding of life. I suggested to him that I could give him
some insight into the subject of Soul, Mind and Body, as a first step to understanding it all, but like most skeptics they already know everything there is to know? It’s not hard to see why the psychics don’t want anything to do
with such a skeptic
As I practice Psychosomatic Healing and have a 90% success rate, money back garantee on what I do,
indicates I have some insight and more than most on the subject of psychosomatic healing.
Tony Andrews, having no training or ability in that field and not even knowing the difference
between psychosomatic healing and psychosomatic medicine, pretends he knows something about it.
I’ve suggested on other websites that if anyone [psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors, nuerologists, criminologists, or any other physical healer] knows more about psychosomatic healing than I do, let them put their money [$1000] where their mouth is.
Psychosomatic Healing
http://www.psychosomatic-healing.co.nz
Tony Andrews Wrote
Thanks for your feedback.
A psychosomatic illness or disorder has physiological symptoms that are
caused by mental processes of the “sufferer” and not by actual physiological
causes. Mental is a combination of intellect and emotion and has nothing to
do with spiritual. To associate spiritual beliefs with psychosomatic
disorders is a mere ruse in an attempt to gain credibility for the existence
of spirituality.
Placebo medicines have been used as a “quick-fix cure” for psychosomatic
disorders in the past. It has been realised however that this method is
merely replacing one belief with another which actually cures nothing. Two
wrongs don’t make a right. Spiritual beliefs are placebos realities and do
nothing to actually cure psychosomatic disorders. You are not practicing
psychosomatic healing you are merely replacing one belief with another and
wrongly claming that the results are a cure. In the process you are sucking
gullible people in to a ludicrous religious belief system that was created
by a science fiction writer.
Have a nice afterlife
Tony