Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: here is one who should be locked in a house for ten years

Posted 1 year ago on May 9, 2013, 7:19 a.m. EST by ericweiss (575)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

A year after Amanda Berry disappeared in Cleveland, her mother appeared on "The Montel Williams Show" to speak to a psychic about what happened to her daughter.

Psychic Sylvia Browne, who has made a career of televised psychic readings, told Louwanna Miller on a 2004 episode of the show that her daughter was dead, causing Miller to break down in tears on the show's set.
"She's not alive, honey," Browne told Miller on the show, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer newspaper. "Your daughter's not the kind who wouldn't call."

Miller told the newspaper that she believed "98 percent" in what Browne told her. Miller died a year later from heart failure.

there is no proof that browne is an Rs or a trickle downer ..... but ....
browne is obviously a lyan crapitalist -
' the mine is safe' -
'the fertilizer factory is safe' -
'everyone should have a gun'

On Monday, Berry was found alive after she broke free from a home in Cleveland where she says she has been kept for the past decade.

Browne did not return phone calls seeking comment today by ABC News. The Montel Williams show, through syndicator CBS, also did not return calls for comment. The show no longer airs new episodes.

It's not the first time that Browne, and other psychics, have come under fire for their involvement in law enforcement cases.

In 2003, Browne incorrectly told the parents of missing teen Shawn Hornbeck that their son was dead, and his body could be found somewhere near "two jagged boulders," according to her premonition.

Nearly four years later, Hornbeck was found alive, and Browne was widely criticized in the media for causing the Hornbecks additional grief.

A website called "Stop Sylvia Browne," dedicated to cataloguing Browne's purported failures at prediction, sprang up in 2006.

Last year, Dwayne Baker told ABC News that after his son went missing in 2007, he was flooded with calls from psychics offering potential leads into the whereabouts of Travis Baker.

"It's very hard,' Dwayne Baker said. "I went through everything. My son was missing for two years, two months and 12 days. "Psychics called me. I even received a DVD in the mail that a guy claimed he could talk to the dead and this was Travis' voice, with no return address. I don't understand why people would want to do that."

"The psychics…" said Baker, 45, before pausing to let out a long sigh. "I hate to say how many of those called me and said they knew where Travis was. My mother and wife went to one and paid them $100."

Travis Baker's remains were located in 2009.

Brad Garret, a former special agent with the FBI and ABC News consultant said that alleged tips from psychics rarely help solve a case.

"As far as finding a victim, finding remains, finding evidence or in any way helping to solve the case, it's never been my experience," he said. "So, it's really a disservice to victims."

"We've never had a psychic lead that turns out to be correct," said Lt. Dave Parker, of the Anchorage, Alaska, police department, after 18-year-old Samantha Koenig went missin

45 Comments

45 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I agree. People have to stop romancing this crap. Really.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Problem is Americans love quackery. Whether its conspiracy theories, religion, psychics, natural healers, etc... Americans just love it. Americans don't care about evidence or science. They love deluded fantasies.

I vote for all quackeries to be considered fraud and a crime. If you can support your claims with evidence, then don't practice and don't publish. Else, prison time.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I agree. More specifically, nailing multiple ID trolls.

[-] 0 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Exactly, Americans are more worried about a guy on a random forum who uses many IDs than they are about the truthfulness of his ideas. They freak out at simple things like this, then they go and worship Alex Jones or LaRouche. Americans are an enigma for sociologists. They just don't make sense.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Frankly, the sooner you get popped the better it will be for Americans in general.

[-] 0 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Americans need me. They need to learn proper logic, proper research methods, proper thinking structures. It might seem like my crusade against conspiracy theories is useless. But, I assure you, it is crucial. Conspiracy theories are the biggest danger in America at the moment.

What Americans don't need is people simply going around forums and throwing around ad hominem and other logical fallacies. We are passed the kindergarten stage. It's time to debate issues like adults and demand evidence.

[-] 3 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Very well then, I demand to see your evidence that conspiracy theories are the biggest danger in America at the moment. Don't have it? Didn't think so. You are what you despise.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

This is mainly an opinion on my part, but a few other scholars share the same point of view.

Here's an interesting article on the matter which is just a few weeks old: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/04/creeping-danger-conspiracy-theorists

Conspiracy theories are already killing many people each year. I have a cousin that died from cancer because she followed conspiracy theorists and decide to use their medical treatment which was quackery instead of going to real doctors.

Conspiracy theories are eroding trust towards governments, business men, doctors, etc... Being skeptical and wary is important towards anyone in power, but conspiracy theorists simply distrust for the sake of distrusting. They are slowing turning people into illogical delusional beings.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Your article looks like typical media propaganda intended to stop people from questioning authority.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

The author of that article is known for questioning authority. Questioning authority is one of the most basic principles of a healthy society! We must do it!

However, conspiracy theorists don't question authority. What they do is provide fantasies about the world which are just a waste of time. Because of conspiracy theories, people are distracted from real life problems which they should be questioning authority about.

If you want to question authority, you must do it with proper questions and proper research methods. Serious journalists and historians to this. Conspiracy theorists don't.

Questioning authority also means investigating the given answers. For example, conspiracy theorists questioned authority about chemtrails. The scientists and governments responded that they don't exist, and that instead what conspiracy theorists are seeing are called contrails (trails caused by condensation). There's all kinds of evidence for contrails, there's no evidence for chemtrails. Conspiracy theorists questioned, got an answer, but refuse the answer because it doesn't fit with their predetermined conclusion. If you question authority, but then dismiss fact and evidence which goes against the answers you predetermined were right it leads to nowhere.

The first step in questioning authority is not having predetermined answers. Conspiracy theorists start with a conclusion. That's bad research methodology. Serious investigators and historians start by asking questions and accumulating evidence. Conclusions come at the end.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Again you show your bias by saying all conspiracy theorists do one thing.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

By definition, they do. Just like scientists do one thing, use the scientific method for research. Conspiracy theorists use flawed methods of research. That's their definition. When events are researched properly we call that investigative journalism or historical analysis.

The problem is you don't understand the definition of conspiracy theories.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

People don't have to conform to your or anybody's definition. Some people that you would label conspiracy theorist do indeed do research properly. Many scientists who do proper research disagree with eachother.

[-] 0 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

I'm not saying there is one evil force that explains it all, but I do believe that there is a financial empire, like the empires of the past, that is composed of many oligarchical families, mostly in Europe and the US, that jointly invest their money into their money into Wall Street and the City of London financial district for the purpose of subverting the nation states of the world.

Your beliefs don't interest me. They are boring and subjective.

Provide evidence and I'll be interested. Until then, it's your own fantasy. We won't solve the problems of the world with such fiction.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

I can assure you that your beliefs are equally subjective and boring to me.

I have many PDFs on oligarchical families and their role in economic subversion, such as the following. I'd offer to send them to you, but because of your preconceived notions about my source, I doubt you would be interested.

Profile of Central Europe's Oligarchy: the Wittgenstein

Lifting the Veil from Oligarchy

The oligarchical fruit of the philosophy of Nazi-communism

International Oligarchy Controls the Radical Farm Protest Movement

The Mellons: Portrait of an American Oligarchic Family

Churchill Boosted Oligarchical Pan-Europe

Oligarchical Policy Is to Turn our Youth into Human Garbage

On Oligarchical Food Cartels, and the Threat of Famine

End the Oligarchy's new order

[-] 0 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

I suppose the authorities of the past had all kinds justifications for why their theories, such as that the universe rotates around the earth, were irrefutable as well. Perhaps in the future, people will look back on our "authorities" in the same way.

I'm not sure what your point is with these comparisons with the past. Times change. We have better tools now, better research methods, better ways to investigate, better philosophical understand of logic, better science.

We now know that evidence is important. Why not use that new knowledge? Why do you want to work like the people in the past, without care for evidence?

We need to prone to modern tools we have and keep making them better. We shouldn't encourage conspiracy theories which are just based on the quackeries of yesteryears.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Times do change, but there are many aspects of human beings that have not changed. Many people are still greedy, lust for power, and will do anything to attain it. They will use anything and anybody to attain power, even scientists and their theories.

Remember, that we are not one hundred years past the Nazi era, and even then the mainstream of their country believed in ideas that we recognize as delusional today. They had many fine authorities who without doubt asserted the superiority of the "master race".

The US today follows in the tradition of blitzkrieg wars around the world and austerity for its own people. I see no reason to trust them.

To me, the most important evidence of today is the failure of our society. The evidence is vast and undeniable. It gives me every reason to question any of today's authorities.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

To me, the most important evidence of today is the failure of our society. The evidence is vast and undeniable. It gives me every reason to question any of today's authorities.

You should question them. They do many things wrong. The problem is you don't care about evidence when you receive answers. With questions comes the responsibility of receiving answers you wouldn't expect, it also comes with the responsibility of verifying the evidence to those answers. Conspiracy theorists ask questions, then make up solutions using logical fallacies instead of evidence. That's their problem. Asking questions is fine.

To me, the most important evidence of today is the failure of our society.

This is not evidence for conspiracy theories. It's just evidence that there are problems in the world. They could be caused by many things. We have to look at each problem individually. The world is a very complex place. A lot of problems are hard to avoid, even by honest hard working people. You don't need one evil force to explain all the problems. It seldom works that way. Even if you had the best economics in the world all working as earnestly as possible, there would still be economical problems. That's because global economics are very complicated!

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Sure economics is complicated, but we understand it enough to do the right thing. FDR did a complete financial reorganization of the banking system in the first two weeks of his presidency, which initiated our economic recovery. This was followed up by the New Deal which produced one of the best economies the world had ever seen.

Today's politicians are doing nothing of the sort, even with clear evidence that we have from the past. This suggests to me that they are being paid not to do the right thing.

I'm not saying there is one evil force that explains it all, but I do believe that there is a financial empire, like the empires of the past, that is composed of many oligarchical families, mostly in Europe and the US, that jointly invest their money into their money into Wall Street and the City of London financial district for the purpose of subverting the nation states of the world.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Perhaps peer reviewed journals do not accept articles that they disagree with.

This is what conspiracy theorists always say. They don't understand how peer reviewed journals work. The articles are chosen by juries made up of scholars. These juries are changed every 6 months. These are serious people who are interested in new discoveries. If someone discovered something interesting chemistry, physics, etc... their work will be published.

The reason conspiracy theorists are never published is the same reason creationist are not published in scientific journals. It's just not scientific. The work is based on flawed research methodology. Conspiracy theorists don't need to be debunk by scholars, they can be debunked by most educated people. Their research is without substance, and simple logic can pin point their logical fallacies.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

I suppose the authorities of the past had all kinds justifications for why their theories, such as that the universe rotates around the earth, were irrefutable as well. Perhaps in the future, people will look back on our "authorities" in the same way.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

What good would that do, as you've already shown, you'll just resort to your perverted insults.

Don't accuse me of saying people are conspiracy theorists even though they do proper research if you can't even contribute a name. Stand by your accusation and provide evidence. Or just don't make empty accusations.

How do you know that the investigative journalists you favor do research properly, do you actually watch them do their research, or do you favor them because they come up with the results that you agree with?

People who do proper research publish their findings and their methods. This provides the ability for other researchers to check their work and point out flaws if necessary. Conspiracy theorists don't publish in peer reviewed journals for that reason. For example, in 12 years 911 Truthers published something like 1 or 2 articles in peer reviewed journals as opposed to the official story which is backed by hundreds of them. The reason conspiracy theorists don't publish is because they don't want to show that their research methods are flawed. If they published, people would quickly realize they have nothing at all.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

To say that your resort to perverted insults is not an empty accusation.

Perhaps peer reviewed journals do not accept articles that they disagree with.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Many scientists who do proper research disagree with eachother.

Disagreements in science don't mean bad research. It means some things are not yet clear. This is entirely normal. Scientists don't claim to know everything. The great thing about disagreeing scientists is that they do tests and look for evidence to back up their claims. Disagreements of yesterday become agreements after evidence is found.

Some people that you would label conspiracy theorist do indeed do research properly.

Give us an example. Who have I named a conspiracy theorist that does proper research?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

What good would that do, as you've already shown, you'll just resort to your perverted insults.

How do you know that the investigative journalists you favor do research properly, do you actually watch them do their research, or do you favor them because they come up with the results that you agree with?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

You don't have any logic. The Americans need you like they need another hole in their heads.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

I think they need to learn about evidence, instead of ad hominem type logical fallacies like you teach them. We already have enough women on PMS with bad hair days, we don't need another one going around insulting others instead of providing well researched claims.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

You are a liar and a piece of shit. A cockroach. We already have enough of those.

[-] -1 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

ad hominem. A unoriginal ad hominem learned in the sandox during kindergarten recess. Those are the worse. Original ad hominem are sometimes fun.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Quit crying you multiple ID lying, conniving, distraction, paid to post, right wing shill.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 1 year ago

Baseless ad hominem. Like Alex Jones, you choose logical fallacies over evidence based analysis. America has become a sad place.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Shaddup, shill.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22316) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (15036) 0 minutes ago

So far so good.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

Good - plenty of cardiovascular exercise to be had around here all day long - Again.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Looks that way.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22316) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (15036) 0 minutes ago

How you doin'? ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

So-Kay & U ?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

So far so good.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22316) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

G-Evening GF

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

How you doin'?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22316) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Short - sweet - and to the point - your comment as well. {:-])

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Thanks.

:D

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22316) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (15036) 4 minutes ago

Looks that way.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

To be expected I guess - it always happens when occupy gets busy.

Good news - http://occupywallst.org/forum/iowa-gop-eyes-pay-cuts-for-pro-marriage-justices/#comment-970208

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What was that about "no need for insults"?

You ARE an insult to all things logical.

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by ericweiss (575) 1 year ago

Houdini spent years exposing this garbage; The Amazing Randi is doing it today

[-] -2 points by Dmooradian (-74) 1 year ago

It's like "hope and change".