talkmagic.co.uk

DrTodd wrote:There have been lots of books written about Hitler too, or any other figure, so not quite sure what the point is...

I think that using the Hitler comparison is a bit over the top, however you'll find the point that I'm making if you click on the link offered to you by sleightlycrazy in the post directly preceeding your own.

Mike.

Michael Jay wrote:

DrTodd wrote:There have been lots of books written about Hitler too, or any other figure, so not quite sure what the point is...

I think that using the Hitler comparison is a bit over the top, however you'll find the point that I'm making if you click on the link offered to you by sleightlycrazy in the post directly preceeding your own.

Mike.

Not over the top for me, just a clear illustration of Tomo's point....but thanks anyway.

DrTodd wrote:Not over the top for me, just a clear illustration of Tomo's point....but thanks anyway.

Oh, I must've just missed it...But now that I've thought about it, you're 100% correct. Comparing a vicious killer of millions from half a century ago to Criss Angel staging a fight is certainly reasonable.

Sarcasm aside, I would have thought that someone with a Ph.D. would know better than to make such an ignorant comparison - a comparison that honestly makes light of a genocidal maniac.

It is to cry.

Mike.

Calm down sparky...hyperbole is used for pedagogical reasons...I just think the whole thing is ludicrous...and anybody can get on telly...if they try...so yes the comparison is not wholly apt but hey it got you going didn't it, which is a pretty funny irony don't you think?

Publicity comes in many forms and just because Angel is getting some does not really mean very much, which I think was the point Tomo was making...

If you want to attack my credentials than do so privately...

DrTodd wrote:If you want to attack my credentials than do so privately...

i've seen Dr. Todd's credentials, and they're huge...he knows how to use them too! ad infinitum

Why Abraxus you make me blush.... seriously Michael the dig was not at you but the silliness of modern TV, which I believe has been the gripe all along about this programme.

Callahan, Criss, and Uri give their thoughts on the scuffle on the NBC Phenomenon site.

So far, i've only watched Callahan's thoughts, which I loved. He describes Criss as a middle aged man dressed as a goth boy, insulting to belief systems, and calls him out on using stooges and camera tricks.

Wahey!

I find it funny that Jim is cheered and congratulated for that interview, for doing exactly what people are jeering and crucifying Criss Angel for on the show.

Not trying to jump on you, Age - but if people say it's unprofessional to "out" someone, you have to point that finger at both of them. Yes, it's retaliation, but he could have taken the "higher path".

It should also be noted that Jim unfairly uses "belief systems". Criss has only been outspoken against HIS belief systems, not belief systems in general.

Funnily enough, after little reconsideration on my part, I believe you to be absolutely correct. Perhaps I'm just delighted at the attack on the smugness that we call Criss... very delighted.

On another note, in the past, I have expressed annoyance at those who draw to the conclusion of stooges and camera tricks for all of Criss' effects. While I'm sure a number of his effects use them, I'm sure a number of them don't... but that's a whole other discussion.

Is Angel playing the Simon Cowell part? Discuss.

Generally Cowell is consistent in his appraisal of talent and is rarely wrong about what works and sells...Angel is stepping over the mark...

Demitri wrote:I find it funny that Jim is cheered and congratulated for that interview, for doing exactly what people are jeering and crucifying Criss Angel for on the show.

Not trying to jump on you, Age - but if people say it's unprofessional to "out" someone, you have to point that finger at both of them. Yes, it's retaliation, but he could have taken the "higher path".

It should also be noted that Jim unfairly uses "belief systems". Criss has only been outspoken against HIS belief systems, not belief systems in general.

I agree and disagree with this...

When you "out" someone in the arrogant manner that people like Angel, Penn Jillette, Randi, Jamie Ian Swiss, etc. do on a steady basis offering absolutely NO respect to those they attack, no sense of decorum on their part, this is an outrage and is anything but professional at any level let alone "honorable".

I also feel that you are playing two-bit lawyer on the whole "Belief System" line in that this has been a loop-hole trick or double standard if you would, used by cynics for years so as to not get into hot-water with religious factions or garner the direct branding of being pure Atheists, which most of these clowns are, their agenda having more to do with destroying people's faith altogether vs. exposing than minority group of would-be predators that they and the evangelists happen to agree upon... it's the old Hitler formula of find common foe's and suck them in on that agenda first then you can stab them in the back later (if you haven't converted them to your side of "logic").

Criss Angel is everything Age made note of and worse, he's managed to convince a whole new crop of up-starts (with the consignment of David Blaine and a handful of other "current" TV personalities) that doing tricks is the same thing as being a "Magician" or "Mentalist" -- they've robbed this craft of the class and standards it once knew... when our "stars" had class, were personable, gave respect to others, and weren't looking down their noses at their patrons in the manner that we find now days via arrogant street punks with family connections climbing him up the ladder... BUYING his "celebrity" (we call it 4-walling within the trade but inventing "a name" goes a bit beyond that -- I digress.)

Outing Angel for his FRAUD AGAINST THE PUBLIC is not a crime... it is the SAME THING as exposing any other charlatan or snake oil peddler... what he presents on TV in order to sell tickets to his shows is a LIE. He is DECEIVING the public for the sake of personal gain and general ego gratification. By his own standards (and those held to by all "debunker" types) he is in the wrong... unless (like most debunker types) his is that double-standard that teaches "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" in the example of "truth".

Sorry, but if the punk-child expects Uri, Jim or anyone else to step up to the table with his B.S. challenges he needs to come clean and live up to the same standards he's setting on everyone else... ANGEL WILL NEVER DO THIS! He knows his career is being flushed down the toilet as we speak and like so many has beens, he's running to the last minute "keep your name in the paper" game of being a supposed debunker. I can assure you that this little twit hasn't invested one second of time in an actual hands-on investigation... but then, that can be said for the majority of the cynics in our world that want to preach what the Gospel of St. James preaches but not invest themselves into discovering the deeper realities of such... the parallels between religious zealots in the world and the current course of the supposed "Skeptics" culture are frightening.

DrTodd wrote:Generally Cowell is consistent in his appraisal of talent and is rarely wrong about what works and sells...Angel is stepping over the mark...

Yeah, that's a good point. After all, X-Factor boils down to Cowell finding a product he can market, with a pantomime presentation while he does so to keep the phone revenues up. Ah, the illusion of control a phone vote brings...!

To be honest, I don't have much sympathy for Jim. Before he appeared on the show, he posted this on another forum (which I'm sure many of you have already read):

I wanted to give a little bit of a heads up as to what I will be doing next week before I have to head out to rehearsal.

As some know I was brought on to the show to demonstrate physical mediumship.
It will be the first time such demonstrations have taken place on live TV.

I will be doing this for real and because of that no exposure is possible.

Angel & Randi may try to bust, or expose but at the end of the day I win for I have the truth of reality.

Jim, J ack & Raymond

I haven't seen the show as I live in the UK, but this looks like Jim throwing the first punch. It was posted on a magicians forum, where people 'in the know' talk about things. And Criss Angel himself advertises on there, and so possibly reads it now and then.
This whole 'I'm really psychic, but sometimes its unreliable, so I have to resort to mentalist methods' argument just doesn't wash with me either. If it were real, would you jeopardise its legitimacy/authenticity by using mentalist methods. I'm not saying that you have to say 'hey...its all a trick', you dont have to make any claims. But if you make such claims on a magic forum of all places, then don't spit out your dummy when its challenged. You cant claim to talk to the dead, and not expect someone to challenge it.

Someone who sells magic/mentalism products that utilise magical concepts and does balloon modelling, and at the same times claims to talk to the dead just comes accross to me as a bit confused.

Check out his website to see his latest project:

http://www.jimclass.com/job_openings_for_the_dead.htm

I dont find him insulting, as he is not claiming (from what I can see) to be channeling some grieving mothers child (yet), or some similar sort of abusive clap trap. But if he is the 'real deal' as he claims, then what was the problem with the challenge? He could have won $1,000,000 and made himself an international star overnight.

With all due respect, Craig - your retorts and comments made about the people you mentioned are every bit as arrogant as theirs. Do you have the utmost respect for James Randi?

Referring to atheists as clowns sure doesn't sound like you have all that much respect for them. Granted, you meant Angel, Randi, Penn, etc. - but that still goes to the "lack of respect" angle you're taking here. Calling people "twit" isn't exactly respectful, either. Are you truly righteous enough to be casting such stones, Craig?

As for "two-bit lawyer" - I think you're wrong. Until I see Criss Angel speak out against the establishment of religion (something he hasn't done, most likely because he's not an atheist), it doesn't apply to him. As for Penn Jillette - he has been very open and honest in speaking his mind, to anyone. He is a very outspoken atheist, so he's not one of the people you can include in your double standard speech, since he's the same across the board.

The problem with both sides of the argument, is that neither of them can find a middle ground. They say there's no such thing as communicating with the dead, and that spiritualism is fake - and that's all that matters. People on your side say that you should either believe in it, or believe that it MIGHT be possible. Your argument doesn't accept that some people don't believe in these kinds of things. You can claim that you're more open-minded, but in truth - you still want them to agree with what you're saying. You're not looking for a middle ground. You're saying they should agree with you, or accept the possibility that you MIGHT be right.

And that's fine. However, you can't stand here and talk about double standards and close-minded thinking, when people on the side of the skeptics and believers are equally as guilty.

If you're saying that Criss Angel and David Blaine have robbed our art of the class and standards it once knew, you need to include quite a few more names in your list. Even the mighty Copperfield took shortcuts that some in the field deemed blasphemous.

I didn't say Jim didn't have a RIGHT to out Criss Angel, or the right to speak his mind. I was merely pointing out that, while he was doing exactly what Criss Angel did earlier in the show, he was not being taken to task for it. You even said you agreed with part of it. You just forgot to mention why.

I also find a distinction between what Angel does, and what some of these so-called psychics are doing. If you cut it down to the basics, all working performers are deceiving the public for personal gain. Last time I checked, you were still accepting payment for your shows, Craig.

Having a show with illusions and magic tricks is a far cry from charging money so some poor widow can pretend to talk to her dead husband. You call it a double standard because you don't agree with their argument. Just like I can call Jim Callahan out on his double standards when he claims that he can communicate with Raymond from the afterlife, while in the next moment talking in a public forum about how he uses Annemann's Test of the Tiber in some of his professional work. If he's the genuine article, why is he using "tricks"?

You can assure me he hasn't invested one second of time in actual investigation? How do you know? Can you say that with complete certainty? Of course not. Craig, I understand that your words come with the weight of decades of experience, but you are not the be-all-end-all. Unless you have actual proof for statements like these, it's really best not to make them. (If you do have proof, please present it, I'd be willing to see it) I'm sure I haven't done as much research as you in this field - but I've done a fair share. I've done enough to formulate my opinion, and I stand firm in my belief. The difference between us though - is that I respect your decision and beliefs. I don't really think you would respect mine.