August 29, 2001 at 5:44 am #62213ginasue39Participant
I hate to even say anything as I do not want to upset anyone. I was just on another board and someone had wrote in and said that JE investigates people that have bought tickets to the show and this is how he gets information on the people he reads. They said he has unlimited resources to find out the things he needs to know. I have only been watching him for a few months now and I am not so sure that this could be done due to the personal information he gives. But since I am new to this, I have to post my questions and thoughts to recieve any information you all have to give me. When I was watching “Good Morning America” they asked if he could go in the audience and see if anything would happen ( if he would be able to read someone ) and he said no, that he needed to mediate beforehand. I was so hoping that he was going to do it to prove that he was not fake. When he declined , my heart sunk. I so want to believe in what he does, I think I would be so crushed if he was ever proven a fake. Please do not take what I have wrote personally, I am here to learn from you guys. Any input on this would be greatly appreacaited….JeannaAugust 29, 2001 at 9:50 am #69540Pam BKeymaster
Jeanna, Don’t worry about upsetting anyone here, your question is normal. One thing I want to caution you on, is that people will go on those “other” unmoderated boards and say anything they wish – libel, slander, speculation, without any accountability for their actions. Those boards can be very negative, and drain you of your energy.
I’m glad you asked the question however, because we have a lot more readers than posters, and perhaps someone else lurking, is asking themselves the same questions too. I’m grateful for the opportunity to comment on it.
It’s natural to question these things, and only you can decide for yourself. You need to consider all the evidence, as there is no solid proof available to anyone.
It’s certainly possible to investigate the names of family members, causes of death, and not that hard to get credit card information, or arrest or driving records. Those kinds of things that John is also able to deliver, is not impressive, or at least, it shouldn’t’t be. John knows this and admits this himself. On a scale of 1-10, those bits of information rate a 2 or a 3. Any fraud could come up with that kind of information. Why deliver that information then? To help identify the people involved.
But John doesn’t stop at the “2 or 3” kind of information. He gets information that according to the person being read “no one could have known.” Information we rate at a level of 9 or 10.
Here’s the question the closed minded skeptics and cynics have yet to provide plausible explanations for:
If you were John, how could you research or investigate prior to a reading under the following circumstances:
* A Gallery reading, where the tickets are free, and you get 4 tickets. Sometimes people bring unrelated friends at the last minute.
* Seminar readings where the tickets were paid for by cash, or again, someone attends at the last minute, or is “dragged” there.
* How could you “research” extremely intimate undocumented details ( the 9’s or the 10’s) without the sitter finding out, such as the following:
— a father helped is now deceased child tie something to the monkey bars at a playground near their home.
— a woman used to carry a brick in her purse when her son was a child
— a mother found a feather on a recent trip to Niagara Falls and told the daughter it was from Dad
— a father had a tattoo of the pink panther
* Then, even if you did have some kind of powers to research this information, how you do remember which person in the Gallery of 120 people, goes with the information while you’re doing 8 hours of readings? You would also have to have photographs, and memorize the person’s face? What about us women who are constantly changing our hair and makeup? Or how would you find that person in a seminar reading of 3000 “General Seating” – unassigned seats? He goes to specific areas, maybe a small 3 row section of about 12 people. He doesn’t’ throw it out to the whole room and then see who “catches” it.
* Exactly what resources are included in the “unlimited resources”? Do those resources include documentation of conversations that happened over the last 30 years? Specifically what kind of databases are available? How do you get access to them? Remember, we’re not talking about the basic information that anyone could get a hold of. We’re talking about the 9’s and 10’s type of information.
Re: Your expectation that he “prove” on demand, on the GMA show. I’m sorry – but that’s a bit unrealistic on a few levels. Why would doing it on that show, “prove” to you any more than watching Crossing Over? What would be the difference? Because it was “live”? Several of us on this board went to see him live, in seminars, to see if “creative editing” was responsible for “the hits” and we’ll tell you here and now, that editing has nothing to do with what he does. You might want to go see him live in seminar, for yourself.
John’s not a trained circus animal who can “perform” on demand. There IS a process to what he does, we can’t snap our fingers and say “do it for us” and then expect him to do it. He’s not working alone here either, he needs the Other Side to work with him. He DOES have to meditate, to clear his mind, relax his body and “connect” with his guides and the other side. If he didn’t have to do that, we’d all be able to walk around all day long and connect to the Other Side while we’re driving our car or cooking our dinner. And, who knows, he might have been in a hostile situation, where the people there were not open and receptive to what he does, and if that’s the case, it doesn’t matter if there’s a whole family reunion on the Other Side waiting to talk to Diane Sawyer herself (which it sounds like she was not, from some of the posts here) – if she’s not open to what’s happening, she won’t validate a thing.
Again, please don’t feel bad for asking in a respectful way. We’re open to discussing these things.
Do you have any other concerns that we can address, about the cynics saying there are plants, microphones or cards to fill out or any other accusations?August 29, 2001 at 10:36 am #69534SanshaParticipant
Good Morning and Welcome…
I don’t think JE does what you suggested. If you watch him, theres just no way he can come up with the things he does. But the biggest thing that shows me he does not ask questions of family and friends, is I know by now someone would have spoken up. Someone would have called the press, or ET, or any media outlet, and start spouting that they and family members were questioned. Also if it is staged with the people read, they are all excellent actors and have certainly missed their calling, lol.
Take care, have a good day, and thanks for getting my brain working this morning.
:jumper:August 29, 2001 at 1:07 pm #69547murphy2747Participant
“Your kidding, Your Dad called you Murphy?”That was the “between you and me, Dad”, validation.As I was preparing to go to Jonns seminar in Houston I was telling folks on the other side to get thier duds on cause we were going to town!:D Most of the people who post here know that I use the nickname that my Dad called me as my member name because John validated it for me. No one has called me Murphy since he died in
19 91.That along with soooo many other messages came through for me.I won’t go through all the standard no one seated us, we didn’t fill out anything etc. etc..If you think it is hard to convience some people that it can be done, try to convience me that it can’t!!
MurphyAugust 29, 2001 at 2:10 pm #69552LeighAEAParticipant
Before my reading, I had the distinct advantage of having an Aunt who had gone to him a few times on Long Island. This to me proved that he knew what he was doing. That he was legit.
However, for that reason, I made sure this wasn’t a detriment and when I wrote in for tickets, I made sure to eliminate any identifying information.
And I had an ace up my sleeve. The SSDI website lists my father’s date of death as 5/15/94, when in reality he crossed on 5/23/94.
John came up with 23. Not 15.
So much fir the researcher theory. This site would be the first resource for an investigator, as it lists birth date, death date, SS#, name, and address (State and county)
Hope this helps.August 29, 2001 at 2:27 pm #69554JudeParticipant
Jeanna, welcome! :wave:
Respectful questions are always welcomed here, because John Edward has absolutely nothing to hide!
I, too, was at the Houston Seminar when Murphy got her reading, although I didn’t “know” her at the time. I do remember her reading, though.
I also got a reading at the Houston seminar and can tell you that John is 100% the real deal. Sorry to say that I don’t remember (wasn’t listening to) any of the readings that came after mine. I was too busy writing down all the validations I had just received.
Murphy and Leigh — Yipee! Great validations! :thumbsup:
Hope this has helped you a bit, Jeanna.August 29, 2001 at 2:46 pm #69557hazeleyzParticipant
When Diane (GMA) asked John if he planted microphones, I was happy with his answer. He said, “I don’t need to.” :)August 29, 2001 at 3:53 pm #69568scrambled6Participant
Hi Ginasue and Welcome!!
I was just on another board and someone had wrote in and said that JE investigates people that have bought tickets to the show and this is how he gets information on the people he reads.
>>>That is the best that the cynics can come with. And yet when they come up with slanderous remarks, they do not realize that they slander our belief system and our faith in the process of doing so. They can not accept the fact, and never will, that what JE does, his message, and the afterlife is for real.
I am just another testimony here, along with Murphy, Leigh, TXJude, Raven and others, coming fourth and stating that no cards were filled out prior to our readings.
Regarding the GMA interview, actually, I am glad that JE did not do readings. He “did not need to” is right. It is up to the individual who wants to believe and no one should convince you otherwise. This is your choice and your understanding, your belief and your faith of whether what he does and the other side is for real. The choice is up to you.
Thanks for posting and if you have any more questions, please feel free to ask away. Take care.August 29, 2001 at 4:22 pm #69569murphy2747Participant
The reason John didn’t do any readings at the show was because he was on a very tight schedule. He was late for a live radio program and did not have time to prepare .John has said that it is not his job to try to get people to believe.His job is to get the messages to those who are open to receive them. I really think GMA knew if he was going to read or not. It looked to me as another way to try to debunk him.I would hate to think GMA was just plain ole tacky.:tsktsk: Murphy:user:August 29, 2001 at 4:54 pm #69571JudeParticipant
Good point, Murphy! :bulb:
I didn’t think of it before, but I would think the people at GMA would’ve already known that he wasn’t going to do any readings. Seems like they’ve always got every second accounted for. Otherwise, they’d have been looking for “fill”, and it didn’t look like they were lacking… :hmm:August 29, 2001 at 5:19 pm #69575RealVladParticipant
Well then I would like to know how JE read me at a seminar of 3,000 people without assigned seats, and when I got my tickets from another person who could not go? LOL
^v^August 29, 2001 at 6:17 pm #69586delusionalblondParticipant
I think that if John Edward possessed the capabilities to research people prior to their readings, he missed his true calling in life. He should work for the FBI or CIA. :)
On Good Morning America he said he hadn’t prepared to do readings… meditaition, prayer. He did graciously agree to stay & answer audience questions… they just didn’t really air much of that.
PamAugust 29, 2001 at 10:10 pm #69597ginasue39Participant
To all that replied to my post, a BIG THANK YOU.:D Like I said, I am new to this and may have many questions. Sometmes when someone asks questions about somenone elses beliefs, they become defensive, and no one did that here. That makes me feel good, and feel that I can ask more questions. All the responses were comforting and very informative. Thank you Pam for taking so much time to post such an in depth response. It was nice to get up and have it all here to read. And I do have another question, it is about dreams, I am going to post it later today, I have to go to work now. See you all later, and Thanks again:D Jeanna
( ginasue)August 29, 2001 at 11:26 pm #69604MurielParticipant
I have a step-daughter who is at that age where she knows everything (not!) and she said to me one time “If John Edward is for real, why isn’t he 100% right all of the time?” I said “My doctor isn’t 100% right all of the time (not even 75%!) but he’s still a doctor, isn’t he?”. I said “This is not an exact science, and even if it were, no one is ever 100% right about everything all the time. No scientist, no minister, no teacher, and no psychic.” :oAugust 30, 2001 at 4:42 am #69623ceceohParticipant
Originally posted by Muriel
I said “This is not an exact science, and even if it were, no one is ever 100% right about everything all the time. No scientist, no minister, no teacher, and no psychic.” :o
And no teenager…but don’t try to tell them that! :D
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.