Sensing Murder

[Murray]

Had to watch it last night as hello it was not a repeat of something they have still not solved from last year. Interesting now that they have the actual investigating policeman who worked the case now in the programme pointing out some of the answers for them. However after watching this one I am surprised it hasnt been solved already. Someone must know who owns/rides the big old Ford with green touch up paint job within the Waikato area. Nothing really new here!!!!! Bit more like crimewatch than sensing murder.

[slofox]

Whenever I see a few minutes of this I end up sensing bullshit.....

[Wingnut]

The thing is. They can describe so much detail about the victims and the incidents but there has never been anything substantual uncovered directly due to their "Psycic Investigation" has there? Everytime it is close, but no cigar! My partner loves that programme. It gets a few debates going on in the household when its on.

Has any of these crimes ever been actualy solved due to sensing murder???

[slimjim]

would belive you would think so... fuck and if not .. why not... can't all be cause of "hear say" :Police: no they don't act to hear say .. :Police:they need fact's :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :shutup:

[Flatcap]

This program is just escapism for the intellectually challenged

[GurlRacer]

The police can't use what the physics say in court, but they do give names etc.

I mean, they may not exactly be able to tell everyone exactly who did it, but maybe give more clues as to how, so maybe the police can revisit the investigation?

Noone has anything to loose by them looking into it!

[Flatcap]

Noone has anything to loose by them looking into it!

Unless police resources are wasted following a wild goose chase made up by some fair-ground freakshow castoff

[ManDownUnder]

Who says they know nothing - there seems to be a lot of opinion against them, but not a lot of hard evidence actively disproving their assertions.

Assuming the TV presentation to be "truthful" (i.e. unscripted and not edited to suit) it seems they are onto something...

[GurlRacer]

Unless police resources are wasted following a wild goose chase made up by some fair-ground freakshow castoff


Lol. Not like the police wouldn't be wasting their time looking into it anyway. Everyone here knows the cops could always be spending time on things more valuable. Unfortunately, thats not the way life goes! It's been 2 months since Dad's accident, and we still haven't got a SCU report. Got the coroner report, and you normally get them the other way around.

[slofox]

Who says they know nothing - there seems to be a lot of opinion against them, but not a lot of hard evidence actively disproving their assertions.

There is even less hard evidence proving their assertions.......besides which, since they are making the assertions, it is up to them to provide proof, not t'other way round....

[mstriumph]

spirits :yawn:

make mine a whiskey please - light on the water

[ManDownUnder]

This program is just escapism for the intellectually challenged

Sounds like an assertion to me


Whenever I see a few minutes of this I end up sensing bullshit.....
Not an assertion - but in the general direction


There is even less hard evidence proving their assertions.......besides which, since they are making the assertions, it is up to them to provide proof, not t'other way round....

I recall 100 years ago there was nothing proving open wounds lead to death by infection

1,000 years ago there was no evidence proving the Earth was flat

2,000 years ago - the Earth was the centre of the Universe...

My point is there may just be a few things we don't yet know. I'm not saying the psychics are right - I'm saying they can't be dismissed outright because someone (or even the masses - who are easily swayed...) holds a cynical viewpoint.

[bungbung]

My point is there may just be a few things we don't yet know.

We do know about EPIC with 500% more hops than most lager style beer, and it is good. What I haven't seen yet is the special version available at the Malthouse with 900% more hops, sounds evil.

[pzkpfw]

I recall 100 years ago there was nothing proving open wounds lead to death by infection

Yes there was. It just hadn't been noticed/studied/recorded.



1,000 years ago there was no evidence proving the Earth was flat

Yes there was. It was wrong, but the folk who thought so didn't just make it up.



2,000 years ago - the Earth was the centre of the Universe...

Actually it is now. In fact I am.

(Really. So are you, but I prefer not to think about that.)



My point is there may just be a few things we don't yet know. I'm not saying the psychics are right - I'm saying they can't be dismissed outright because someone (or even the masses - who are easily swayed...) holds a cynical viewpoint.

Oh please.

The old "we can't prove it isn't so it might be" line.

I guess you have to believe my claim that an invisible mass-less dragon lives under the seat on my Z.

Some decent proof of physic ability would shut up the cynics.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[James Deuce]

I guess you have to believe my claim that an invisible mass-less dragon lives under the seat on my Z.


There's one under mine, but he won't talk to Dutch people.

[slofox]

We do know about EPIC with 500% more hops than most lager style beer, and it is good. What I haven't seen yet is the special version available at the Malthouse with 900% more hops, sounds evil.

It's called "mayhem"....and it is good........:devil2: (But it's Pale Ale, not lager...although they do make a lager as well......only 100% more hops (or so)...)

[scumdog]

This program is just escapism for the intellectually challenged

Now ain't THAT the truth!!:niceone:

The pommie 'psychic' from the earlier shows was in a write-up in some crappy womans magazine, she said she had been threatened by somebody if she went ahead with one of her 'shows'.
But being the brave woman that she is she told the mag "I wasn't going to let anything get in the way of my work solving murders"

SOLVING murder???? How many plurry murder has she 'solved'???:rolleyes:

[DMNTD]

The old "we can't prove it isn't so it might be" line.

I guess you have to believe my claim that an invisible mass-less dragon lives under the seat on my Z.

Some decent proof of physic ability would shut up the cynics.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Ummmm....praise Jesus?? :sunny:

[martybabe]

Now ain't THAT the truth!!:niceone:

The pommie 'psychic' from the earlier shows was in a write-up in some crappy woman's magazine, she said she had been threatened by somebody if she went ahead with one of her 'shows'.
But being the brave woman that she is she told the mag "I wasn't going to let anything get in the way of my world the k solving murders"

SOLVING murder???? How many plurry murder has she 'solved'???:rolleyes:


Try and catch it next week Scummy, If you've not got to watch paint dry or anything. The trailer said the psychics are put to task by the police scrutanizing their every whatsit. Be interested in your thoughts on that episode. :confused:

[Broomrider]

There seems to be a lot more evidence put forward that verifies what they say... more so than any "proof" that the great sky fairy exists anyway .... :whistle:


ok got ma hat and coat..."Taxi" !!!

[ManDownUnder]

Yes there was. It just hadn't been noticed/studied/recorded.
*WOOOSSSSHHHHH*



Yes there was. It was wrong, but the folk who thought so didn't just make it up.
*WOOOSSSSHHHHH*



Actually it is now. In fact I am.

(Really. So are you, but I prefer not to think about that.)


Slightly off topics but nice - like it



Oh please.

The old "we can't prove it isn't so it might be" line.

I guess you have to believe my claim that an invisible mass-less dragon lives under the seat on my Z.

No... but if I can't disprove it then I have no grounds to say you are wrong... (refer woosh number's one and two above).

You obviously don't believe in it - that's cool. What YOU believe (or don't believe) isn't the truth just because you believe it (you're important sure - but not THAT important)

Greameboy believe in God - does that mean God therefore exists? So be definition of his faith I expect he does NOT believe in evolution. To follow your logic - what you believe is therefore true, we end up with a nonsensical situation of nothing existing because any one faction that does NOT believe it exists (because they can't imagine it - or are simply not willing to).

I'm not saying you have to believe in psychics... I am saying you can't just dismiss what you don't think it true in the absence of evidence.

[Clockwork]

The problem from my POV is that these mediums say so much, yet never anything that can be nailed down. It just shouldn't be that hard to provide incontrovertable proof!

[skidMark]

I have met the blonde psychic dude in mission bay, was drooling all over his busa....

Talked shit for a few minutes...

It was a real shiny busa... :devil2:

As you were.

[pzkpfw]

No... but if I can't disprove it then I have no grounds to say you are wrong... (refer woosh number's one and two above).

You obviously don't believe in it - that's cool. What YOU believe (or don't believe) isn't the truth just because you believe it (you're important sure - but not THAT important)

Greameboy believe in God - does that mean God therefore exists? So be definition of his faith I expect he does NOT believe in evolution.

Most that is basically a quibble about the difference between what a person believes is true (subjective) and what is somehow "really" true (objective).

That's not really the issue here.



To follow your logic - what you believe is therefore true, ...

That's not the issue either; but yes, generally what I believe, I believe to be true. So I say it as such. That's pretty normal.

If you like, when anybody ever gives you their opinion you can imagine them adding "...but I may be wrong."



...we end up with a nonsensical situation of nothing existing because any one faction that does NOT believe it exists (because they can't imagine it - or are simply not willing to).

Is the reverse better? Everything exists because at least one person was able to imagine it?

What has actual existance got to do with it anyway? Are we in the matrix or a dream?

It seems you think people should accept that some nonesense is "might be" true, because they can't prove it isn't? That is the nonsensical situation.

The inability to prove a negative makes it nonsense to accept things "just in case" they might be true, because it can't be proven they are not.



I'm not saying you have to believe in psychics... I am saying you can't just dismiss what you don't think it true in the absence of evidence.

Yes I can dismiss it.

If you said "I have a cup of coffee on my desk" I would probably believe it. It might not be true, and I could turn out to be wrong in my belief, but desks and coffee are normal things that are likely to be within your reach.

If you said "I am levitating while I type this, so I don't need a chair" I would not believe it, because levitation is unproven.

Going around not dismissing all the wild stuff "just in case" is the nonsense.


If one of these TV psychics actually solved a murder, that'd be nice.

[ManDownUnder]

It seems you think people should accept that some nonesense is "might be" true, because they can't prove it isn't? That is the nonsensical situation.

a ha - for me this is the nub of the question. Why is that a nonsense?

If you can't prove something isn't true, how can you ever know it's nonsense? There's a diamond weighing over 24 kilo yet to be dug up in South Africa...

Are you able to say I'm wrong? It is nonsense?

[pzkpfw]

a ha - for me this is the nub of the question. Why is that a nonsense?

If you can't prove something isn't true, how can you ever know it's nonsense? There's a diamond weighing over 24 kilo yet to be dug up in South Africa...

Are you able to say I'm wrong? It is nonsense?

Do you actually read my posts or just respond to bits of them?

I'd class that diamond as within the realms of possibility, until I get more information from a geologist (maybe a 24kg diamond is considered impossible to form naturally, I don't know).

If you said you knew it was there because a psychic once told you you'd find it - now that I'd class as nonsense.

[Geologists are real, psychics are not.]

You still basically want to say anything should be treated as possible.

I am not saying everything should be treated as impossible.

[ManDownUnder]

Do you actually read my posts or just respond to bits of them?

Both (they're not mutually exclusive... worth keeping in mind for the topic at hand)


I'd class that diamond as within the realms of possibility, until I get more information from a geologist (maybe a 24kg diamond is considered impossible to form naturally, I don't know).

You don't know??? Cool! Is it possible you also don't know if psychic phenomina are real or not?

Or do you know they are not real because they are "nonsense". And how did you arrive at "nonsense" anyway?


If you said you knew it was there because a psychic once told you you'd find it - now that I'd class as nonsense.

[Geologists are real, psychics are not.]
Ok - see that's nonsense. Of course psychics are real. You can see them, touch them (within reason of course). What they do is open to interpretion for sure...



You still basically want to say anything should be treated as possible. Yes, unless proven or disproven - at which point it changes from possible to definite.


I am not saying everything should be treated as impossible.Agreed!

[pzkpfw]

You don't know??? Cool! Is it possible you also don't know if psychic phenomina are real or not?

Or do you know they are not real because they are "nonsense". And how did you arrive at "nonsense" anyway?

Psychics can be treated as nonsense because psychic ability is yet to be proven and is too far from what is actually observed to be "real".

Not knowing something is not a reason to believe it is real.

Once again, the point is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I'd believe you if you said you had a cup of coffee. I don't know if you have a cup of coffee; but it would be possible to prove, and I have seen cups of coffee.

I'd not believe you if you said you had a pink unicorn, for what should be obvious reasons, unless you are sticking to the "I can't prove you don't so I have to accept you might" line. No way.



You don't know??? Cool! Is it possible you also don't know if psychic phenomina are real or not?

You can't use that as a basis for anything, otherwise any number of wild and wacky ideas could be proposed - like my under-seat-dragon.



Ok - see that's nonsense. Of course psychics are real.

Silly nit-pick, my meaning was clear.



Yes, unless proven or disproven - at which point it changes from possible to definite.

So we are back to your implication that absolutely anything is possible, no matter how far-fetched.

No way.

Unless you think my under-seat-dragon is possible.



Agreed!

What about my claim (just above the bit you agreed with) of what you think? Do you agree or disagree?

[ManDownUnder]

Psychics can be treated as nonsense because psychic ability is yet to be proven and is too far from what is actually observed to be "real".
Can water run uphill - how's that for a question to be examined? Would you class that as nonsense and dimiss it outright?

Just because water runs downhill - does that mean it can't run uphill? (or against the force of gravity in case you're wondering how I'm putting a spin on this...)



You can't use that as a basis for anything, otherwise any number of wild and wacky ideas could be proposed - like my under-seat-dragon.
Yes - wildy and wacky ideas can and should be proposed... examined... tested and learned from accordingly. See my question above re water running uphill - what is the problem with that?



So we are back to your implication that absolutely anything is possible, no matter how far-fetched.

No way.

Unless you think my under-seat-dragon is possible.

What about my claim (just above the bit you agreed with) of what you think? Do you agree or disagree?

Disagree - you're reading too much into what I'm saying and trying to make it absolute. My position is simple - when presented with evidence of a phenominon of whatever form, one is foolish to dismiss it in the ansence of compelling evidence to the contrary. If there is uncertainty we should be satisfied to say there is uncertainty rather than take a position either for or against anything proposed that attempts to explain that phenominon.

I.e. - we should keep an open mind.

Or to put it another way - using the scientific method - prove to me there is no such thing as psychic ability. Free reign - go for gold. Until you can do that, I reserve the right to say I'm not sure. I also think that if you are sure, you need to be able to demonstrate that, and also be flexible enough to admit when you're not able to do so, or are actually uncertain of something.

[pzkpfw]

we should keep an open mind.

If your mind is too open, your brain will fall out.

[pzkpfw]

Can water run uphill - how's that for a question to be examined? Would you class that as nonsense and dimiss it outright?

Just because water runs downhill - does that mean it can't run uphill? (or against the force of gravity in case you're wondering how I'm putting a spin on this...)


I sense a trap, as I vaguely remember some riddle about this, but in essence I'd of course say "no it can't". if you come up with some situation where it does then I'd have learned something.

But I'd be right to dismiss it at first.

You still don't get the coffee/levitation example. Some claims are simply nonsense.



Yes - wildy and wacky ideas can and should be proposed... examined... tested and learned from accordingly. See my question above re water running uphill - what is the problem with that?


So would you like to examine the Dragon under my seat?

You need to draw a line at what has any chance of being correct.

Fairies, elves and psycics are all on the same side of that line.



Disagree - you're reading too much into what I'm saying and trying to make it absolute.

I am as absolute as you, just in reverse, and you don't see that as yours is the fuzzy "everything is possible" stance.



My position is simple - when presented with evidence of a phenominon of whatever form, one is foolish to dismiss it in the ansence of compelling evidence to the contrary. If there is uncertainty we should be satisfied to say there is uncertainty rather than take a position either for or against anything proposed that attempts to explain that phenominon.

What evidence?
What uncertainty?
Has a murder been solved yet?

(Good to see you've now introduced the "evidence" thing though; previously you've basically been holding onto mere suggestion. Now "evidence" - that can be examined. Of course it has, in the case of ESP, Psychics and such. But never has it been proven.)


Or to put it another way - using the scientific method - prove to me there is no such thing as psychic ability. Free reign - go for gold. Until you can do that, I reserve the right to say I'm not sure. I also think that if you are sure, you need to be able to demonstrate that, and also be flexible enough to admit when you're not able to do so, or are actually uncertain of something.

No, negatives can't be proved.

I can't prove there is no God either - as if there is a God then I can assume he/she/it is powerful enough to hide his/her/its existance from me.

That does not make the existance of God true, nor should I accept the possibility of one.

Do you really think I can say I've got an under-seat-dragon - until you've proven it doesn't exist?

How would you do that?

[ManDownUnder]

So would you like to examine the Dragon under my seat? Sure would - but since I can't detect it's presence I need to rely on you to help me examine it.

Go for it. I remain cynical until I'm convinced.



You need to draw a line at what has any chance of being correct. Fair call. I'm cynical about your dragon given the nature of conversation in which it was introduced.







I am as absolute as you, just in reverse, and you don't see that as yours is the fuzzy "everything is possible" stance.
You're right - because I don't. I'm saying if some evidence is provided that suggests something exists, in the absence of anything categorically ruling it out, then there remains a chance that it does indeed exist.


What evidence?
What uncertainty?
Has a murder been solved yet?
The whole show is based on what is purported to be psychic phenomina If the show is accurate is reporting the psychics in reading a map and taking a car to the exact location where a body was found - in the greater Auckland region, with no external or additonal cues... I'd take that as a strong indicator something is going on - wouldn't you?

(That's the evidence).

Uncertainty comes in the form of me remaining unconvinced it's true - but then I'm also not convinced it's not. Not doubt non psychic experts can rely on their prowess and state psychich phenomina does not exist.

But then psychic experts can clima the opposite. Who would you give more credability?

Has a murder been solved yet - No. I don't believe any of them have. This would be through a combination of the lack of evidence, and the lack of admission of that evidence by the NZ court system



(Good to see you've now introduced the "evidence" thing though; previously you've basically been holding onto mere suggestion. Now "evidence" - that can be examined. Of course it has, in the case of ESP, Psychics and such. But never has it been proven.) "Evidence" embraces the concepts of both "court of law" standard of demonstration, as well as something that is evident (i.e. a cloud forms - so the water in the air becomes evident).

Like I said - locatin the spot a body was fgound int he greater Auckland region would be pretty impressive.! Combined with the chances of getting the age, sex, race and cause of death right...

What would the statistical chances of that be do you reckon? 1 in a couple of million? Considerably higher I'd suggest?



No, negatives can't be proved. actually some of them can, but not in this case - again - just being picky for the sake of completeness

I can't prove there is no God either - as if there is a God then I can assume he/she/it is powerful enough to hide his/her/its existance from me.


That does not make the existance of God true, nor should I accept the possibility of one. Entirely over to you. It's worth noting a number of leading minds in the scientific field believe (and believed) in God. Einstein was one, and numerous of his peers also.

The same holds true today. (Some Psychics do too - and some don't - interesting huh?)

Out of curiousity - what cost is it to you to nolt consider the possibility of a God, or of... well - anything for that matter?


Do you really think I can say I've got an under-seat-dragon - until you've proven it doesn't exist?
Not personally... but if you genuinely believed there is (and I don't think you do for a second) then I'd give you the opportunity to convince me, not just now - but on going...


How would you do that?
I can't - that's my exact point. Thank you

And basic logic dictates that it leaves things in a state of uncertainty. Incredibly bloody unlikely for sure... and if you (or to avoid it being personal) if a friend of mine insisted there was a dragon under their seat there would be a reason for it. THAT is what I'd want to find if I could.

Most likely hallucinations or a brain chemical imbalance or mental illness...

Back to the psychics though - the stuff they claim to channel is pretty restrictive knowledge, and if the reporting is accurate then yeah - wow.

Righto - have to go home but last thing the water running uphill. Quite right. In a quantum state where atomic vibration is reduce to zero (or below some critical limit) the effects of gravity stop applying for some reason and droplets can flow uphill out of their containers.

There's also a number of experiments dem,onstrating water "flowing uphill" on a vibrating plate due to surface tension elongating the droplets yada yada but that's not nearly so cool as the quantum example in my opinion.

[scumdog]

OK, you can say "Well prove the psychics are wrong" - but that's not the point.

The point is that I'm waiting to hear of ONE murder being actually solved by a psychic. (Let alone they have 'solved several' as some claim)

[Flatcap]

OK, you can say "Well prove the psychics are wrong" - but that's not the point.

The point is that I'm waiting to hear of ONE murder being actually solved by a psychic. (Let alone they have 'solved several' as some claim)

Ha! It would be amusing to see the psychic giving evidence in court.

"I sense that Bob killed his wife and buried her near water"

Perhaps actual investigative effort would be required to secure a conviction....

[spudchucka]

Personally i think that the whole psychic murder solving thing can only really have one of two possible realities. Its either a complete hoax or its utterly genuine. I don't see there being any middle ground and I'm totally on the fence until I see any tangible worth to their work. If they could actually find the remains instead of just pointing to the map and saying its in this area I'd be willing to believe but so far there's been nothing of any real substance to cause me to get off the fence.

[Flatcap]

Personally i think that the whole psychic murder solving thing can only really have one of two possible realities. Its either a complete hoax or its utterly genuine. I don't see there being any middle ground and I'm totally on the fence until I see any tangible worth to their work. If they could actually find the remains instead of just pointing to the map and saying its in this area I'd be willing to believe but so far there's been nothing of any real substance to cause me to get off the fence.

Well, I hope you don't get splinters in your scrotum...

[Murray]

Back to the initial question. How can the police not solve it when they know it was a big, repainted green, old Ford from within the Waikato who attended the party along with a lot of other local waikato people and there were two people in the car and they know approx what time it happened. They knew all this and the physchic's actually added nothing to what the police already knew except that maybe someone in the BP in Morrinsville may know something???

You would think this case should have been long over rover!!!

[slofox]

a big, repainted green, old Ford from within the Waikato !

I only borrowed it!!! Honest!!!! It ain't mine!!!

[Skyryder]

I sense a trap, as I vaguely remember some riddle about this, but in essence I'd of course say "no it can't". if you come up with some situation where it does then I'd have learned something.


Liquid can 'run uphill' by way of a siphon but it must exit lower than the source.

Something to do with air pressure.


Skyyrder

[Skyryder]

Michal Laws was on about this on Friday. Something about not solving one case. I can keep an open mind on a lot of wacky things but psychics and those that claim that they can predict the future 'aint' one of them. For those that believe and claim they have the 'gift' I'll go halves in Lotto if you can give me the winning number.


Skyyrder

[ManDownUnder]

Just to clarify my position on this - Spuddy summed it up. I'm not arguing that psychics are for real.

I'm simply arging the case they can't be ruled out because someone (or a lot of someones) thinks it is nonsense and label it accordingly. They can do that - no problems, but please don't expect me to believe what someone else believes just because they say so. Sounds like a religion argument of old?

[Taz]

The moon is hollow. Aliens live there.

[cold comfort]

Michal Laws was on about this on Friday. Something about not solving one case. I can keep an open mind on a lot of wacky things but psychics and those that claim that they can predict the future 'aint' one of them. For those that believe and claim they have the 'gift' I'll go halves in Lotto if you can give me the winning number.


Skyyrder

Absolutely -to quote Raybon Kan (Sunday Star times) "I see dud people". Names and addresses of the criminals please!

[Lias]

Absolutely -to quote Raybon Kan (Sunday Star times) "I see dud people". Names and addresses of the criminals please!

That was a really great piece he wrote.. had me cracking up.. nearly caused a blue with the missus thou because she believes in that claptrap.