Skeptic Answers Your Questions on Psychics
Dec. 11 -- 20/20 recently profiled John Edward, a popular with psychic with a hit television show, Crossing Over, and several best-selling books to his credit. Dr. Michael Shermer, Editor and Publisher of Skeptic magazine and a monthly columnist and contributing editor to Scientific American, answers viewers' questions about psychics and the paranormal below.
Introduction From Skeptic Michael Shermer
Thanks to ABC for posting this Internet dialogue. I wish that I could answer all 350+ letters that viewers sent, but time constraints prohibit it. I have selected a couple of dozen letters, some friendly and supportive, most negative and critical. It was roughly one-third positive, two-thirds negative, better than I expected, actually.
A number of viewers inquired how I would test John Edward scientifically. Here's how: Edward, along with Sylvia Brown, James Van Praagh, Rosemary Altea and others, claim that they can tell whether it is a man or woman coming through from the other side. Male or female gives us a simple binary choice and coin-flip model for a test. Get 50 people, each of whom writes down before the reading whether it is a man or woman in their life who passed over. Without asking questions of each subject, the psychic then determines whether it is a man or woman coming through for each of the 50 subjects. Through pure guessing, or flipping a coin, we would expect a 50% hit rate, or 25 correct out of the 50 subjects. Of course, some psychics, by chance, will get 26 or 27 right, others 23 or 24 right. The hit rate, in fact, will vary around a bell curve, or probability distribution curve. By chance some may even get 30 right or only 20 right. But how many does the psychic need to get right for science to conclude that their hit rate was not due to chance but to some other effect (such as genuine psychic power). The answer, at the 95 percent confidence level, is 37. If John Edward could get 37 hits out of 50 in this simple test, he could legitimately claim that he had passed a scientific test of his powers.
Finally, let me note in general that I am sensitive to and empathetic with the emotions evoked by loss, death, and grief — the emotions that underlie most of the responses from participants and viewers of Crossing Over. I have lost both of my biological parents (I have two surviving step-parents), and most recently assisted my mother through a nearly-decade-long battle with brain cancer (my most recent column in Scientific American, "What's the Harm?" discusses this). I think of my mom often, wishing I could talk to her so that she could help me through some troubled times. Alas, wishing it were so does not make it so, and my mom has never spoken to me despite the fact that she knew how much I loved and needed her. Such is the nature of life, and death.
— Michael Shermer
Q+A
QUESTION: How do you know that people cannot connect with those who have crossed over? There have been many who have written books on the subject over hundreds of years. So my question is why should I listen to Michael Shermer? As far as I can see he has proven NOTHING. Mr. Shermer in his own words is Baloney.— Carla Smith
ANSWER: You shouldn't listen to Michael Shermer, or anyone else for that matter. The first principle of skepticism is to check it out yourself, and remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Of course, I cannot prove that it is impossible that psychics can talk to the dead, any more than I can prove that the pet psychic doesn't really talk to pet hamsters. One cannot prove a negative, as it is said. Nevertheless, we can estimate the probability of claims being true or false, and to that extent, from the evidence I have seen, it is highly probable that dead people cannot talk to us.
Q: How do you explain the live shows, like the ones he does on Larry King, or the pay-per-view ones. He doesn't see these people and it's live. I don't hear him rattling off hundreds of names, he usually gets names pretty close. Lots of times he says things no one else would know such as … "What happened to your arm, or someone you know's arm, did it get burned?" Yes, her sister's did! OR...Are holding something of your mom's in your hand right now? Yes she was. How do you explain that?— Shawna
A: "He usually gets names pretty close." Usually? Exactly how usual? Herein lies the problem in testing the validity of psychics. What constitutes a hit? How many total statements and/or questions were made? How many misses? What was the ratio of hits to misses? How many hits would be expected by chance? These are the sorts of questions that scientists and skeptics ask. The only way to really know is to run the test I proposed at the top of this document.
Q: About a year or so ago, I think it was on a late night show like Jay Leno or Letterman, another man who did the exact same thing as John Edward was on. He was obviously working off of the popularity that Edward was receiving. But he was just as "accurate", he even rubbed his hands like Edward does, and had the same vocal inflection, style of presentation, like an exact duplicate!! Physically and personality wise, he was different: he was on the chubby side and talked about his wife and family. I was flabbergasted when I saw this guy on TV, because the obvious deduction one arrived at was that whatever John Edward was "doing", so was this guy! I thought at the time, "This will destroy the J. Edward Illusion!" — and I never heard of him after that! It would have been different if his style was unique, but he was a carbon copy of John Edward. It made John Edward's "show" appear to be a complete hoax — even though it remained unclear how he gets away with it.— Laci Meszaros
A: I too have noticed that the psychics, like comedians and magicians, pick up each other's lines, patter, moves, and tricks. This is because talking to the dead is an act, and like any stage act it can be improved through practice and watching what other people do.
Q: Does Mr. Shermer still believe that the Earth is flat and that it is the center of the universe?— Helen Vasquez
A: What? It isn't?
Q: Don't you think the biggest factors in accounting for the rise in belief in the paranormal are the many television shows which promote it? Especially egregious are the so-called Learning Channel, History Channel, Larry King, and network shows such as all the crop circle, UFO, alien autopsy, etc. programs — not to mention the sci-fi channel, Discovery, and Crossing Over. People are drowning in the promotion of paranormal & superstitious beliefs. The level of incredulity is not only astounding, it is a shameful national disgrace! What can unbelievers and skeptics do against the veritable ocean of cultural clap-trap promoting such beliefs?— Sharon Nichols
