This morning, I made a telephone call to Star Crystals & Healing in Oadby, Leicester, who were hosting a psychic for the day to do "readings". Cold?
Thanks to the recent Consumer Protections from Unfair Trading Regulations 2007, "psychics" need to advertise their services as for "scientific experiments" unless they have evidence to back them up. As Joanne Jordan did not do this, I assumed she must be a genuine psychic with proven powers - so I phoned to check. The lady on the phone insisted that this "psychic" was for real. So I booked a session. And recorded it.
Rather unsurprisingly, if you don't tell Joanne Jordan, Psychic Medium everything, apparently she can't get it from either the cards or the dead.
After about 15 minutes (12:36 on the MP3 linked below) of Joanne not producing anything relevant and insisting that it works better if the communication was two-way, I got a bit bored and decided to see what happened if I fed her some false information. "Psychic baiting" is the term used for this by Ian Rowland, author of the excellent Full Facts Book Of Cold Reading.
Joanne Jordan was soon making contact with my father who died of cancer (he's currently on holiday in France and to my knowledge, cancer free and alive).
What was most worrying however, was when Joanne Jordan was telling me that the cards were showing that someone very close to me was lying to me, and implying that it was my wife. For a typical gullible punter, this could have destroyed their relationship. They'd be living in a state of permanent suspicion to their partner simply because this woman is able to get away with charging £35 to make stuff up.
So - is Joanne Jordan a Fraudulent Psychic Medium or is she just self-deluded? I'm not really sure. But even if it's the later, she's certainly guilty of charging for her "powers" before properly checking she's got them. As I've shown, it's not difficult to do a simple test.
You can hear the MP3 here: http://www.mediafire.com/?tg1mcmgwwa0
I'll try to do more similar recordings, though it will be difficult while I'm in Tignes.
Posts
72 comments:
Excellent post. Time after time, it is shown that if a psychic doesn't have the chance to cold or hot read they have nothing to say. She may well be deluded (and thats being kind) in that she starts off her party trick and her friends tell her she must be psychic. And she believes it.
On the other hand, she may be a knowing fraud. Either way, she should stop. Psychics are not guidance/grievance/marriage counsellors, nor are they private detectives. They should stop trying to involve themselves in people's lives and get a proper job.
Just had a very kind note from Ian Rowland, Author of probably the best book on Cold Reading, the technique used by fake psychics.
Dear Simon,
Thank you SO much for having taken the trouble to do this, and for letting me (and the world) hear the spectacular results. You were BRILLIANT. I thought the whole thing was pretty good, but when she started offering you a choice of cards and talking about unicorns and fairies, well, I just lost it completely. It was hysterical. I truly have no idea how you managed to keep a straight face during that part. The ‘baiting’ bit worked very, very well, and you handled the ‘reveal’ part at the end superbly, if I may say so. Absolutely first-rate stuff.
I have never seriously advocated that people should go around ‘psychic-baiting’. When I first added that part to the book I thought it was clear I was writing tongue-in-cheek, and in the most recent edition I added a note to make this clear, and to resolve any misunderstandings. But that having been said, when someone goes through with the experiment and does it as well as you did, in such an intelligent and non-prejudicial way, I would say that it constitutes a valuable piece of investigative journalism. At no point were you rude or offensive, or anything less than perfectly polite and well-mannered, which I approve of and think is the right approach. You were not confrontational or aggressive. I would say that you were never prejudicial, unfair or closed-minded at ANY point, although some would disagree and take the view that supplying one falsehood about your father was aggressive / prejudicial / unfair or otherwise illegitimate. After all, if you feed false information about your symptoms to a doctor, he’ll give you a wrong diagnosis.
I thought it was wonderful. I had a look around the rest of your site. Good luck with the fatwa.
Cheers,
- Ian
Kudos on the comment from Ian Rowland! I must say that I disagree with the comment about giving a false symptom to a doctor. In the case of a doctor, if you say your arm hurts the doctor will go to your arm - s/he will look for physical symptoms to treat.
In the case of a psychic, they allegedly already know what's wrong. If they are genuine, they should be able to see through any falsehoods and call you on them.
The fact that your fakery went undetected would tend to point to the fact that you saw a fraud/deluded person.
thanks xavierp. I 1/2 agree with you. The psychic doesn't claim to know everything; even from the MP3 you can hear that "it works better if the communication is 2 way".
However, I think what provides evidence to the fraud/delusion hypothesis is the psychic's confirmation.
If you lied to a doctor by wrongly claiming that you'd had a pacemaker fitted, then he examined you and said "yes, I can independently verify the pacemaker" then you'd have sufficient evidence to show that at least on one occasion, the doc had no idea what he was talking about.
The psychic claimed to communicate with my dead father. He's alive. Case dismissed.
Yeah, I think the chat with your "dead" father is a bit of a giveaway. The normal get out is that if you lie to the spirits, they will play along/lie back. Which sounds a bit stupid to me - if a dead relative really wanted to get in touch with me, I doubt they'd waste everyone's time by playing stupid games!
There are a lot of questions and a lot of "I hope this makes sense to you" in there - very much casting about to make you respond and give her more information.
The other hypothesis is that once you're dead, you develop a great sense of humour and wish to communicate with your relatives via a medium, passing the message: "try April" .... "OK, May" ........ "how about August; does that mean anything"?
I totally disagree with your summary of Joanne Jordan
I have attended many group sessions where Joanne Jordan has performed as a medium. I have been astonished at the detail and accuracy of her readings – and so have others. Joanne Jordan in my opinion is a very professional person who, without doubt has been gifted with very special powers. Without these powers, it would have been impossible to recall the level of detail (including names and places etc.) I have seen her deliver to complete strangers.
Patrick Davison
Pat:
Cold reading is a very powerful technique and people regularly leave cold reading sessions fully convinced that they've seen psychic powers. Your story fits perfectly with my hypothesis that Joanne is simply cold reading – this is exactly the sort of anecdote I’d expect from someone who has visited a cold reader. Of course, we’d expect the same from someone who had psychic powers too.
Can I suggest that at this moment you don't actually know whether it was cold reading, psychic powers or something else because you have not attempted to eliminate the possibility of cold reading when visiting Joanne Jordan?
If you are open-minded enough to consider there is a chance you might be wrong, can I suggest you visit JJ again, but this time eliminating the possibility of cold reading?
Bring someone who JJ has never met before, someone who she has no clue about. Put this person behind a curtain and ask them to be quiet during the reading. This will eliminate the possibility of cold reading.
Record the reading, then listen to it again writing down all of the claims. See how many match the person, and how many match others.
If JJ has any contact whatsoever with the person, or is informed anything about them, cancel and then start again with someone else.
If you are open-minded enough to try this, I'd be more than happy to consult with you to ensure the proper controls are in place. Either way, I'd love to hear the results.
Simon
With the title of “Adventures in Nonsense” would this suggest to readers that you are contributing a fair and balanced personal opinion on the subject and only highlighting certain mediums whom you feel are not worthy of the title, or are you a sceptic and wish to expose and discredit the whole profession? I suppose I am asking - do you believe in the spiritual world?
Patrick Davison
Patrick,
You are asking a loaded question by giving me the choice between "contributing a fair and balanced personal opinion" or "being a sceptic".
To have a fair and balanced opinion, it would require someone not only to have visited a psychic, but to have done so under fairly controlled conditions instead of walking in blindly. It would require someone to have studied evidence against the existence of a spirit world as well as for. It would require someone who was well read on cold reading and other techniques that can be used to simulate psychic ability. It would require someone to understand areas of psychology related to psychic belief. It would require someone with an understanding of epistemology. It would require someone who has looked at scientific research into psychic abilities. It would require someone who understood the arguments on both sides.
So - yes, I think my opinion is fair and balanced. Yes, I am a sceptic. No, I don’t believe in the spirit world.
But if evidence for the existence of the spirit world was presented to me – evidence that was stronger than the vast amount of evidence against, then I’ll change my mind.
You didn’t answer my question – are you open minded enough to put Joanne Jordan to the test, or will you carry on believing based on a personal experience?
Simon.
Simon
Regardless of the content of your response, to which I will summarise at some stage, the question of your fair assessment of the subject contains little or no credibility - particularly now having admitted to being a sceptic. The result of which basically means that any medium you decide to target will be condemned before trial according to “your opinion”. Let me once again emphasise – “your opinion”.
Pat: I think you've confused scepticism (looking at the evidence and taking an opinion based upon it) with cynicism (rejecting everything).
I think you've also confused "my opinion", which is of no value whatsoever, with the apparent evidence - which is significant.
I have been to see Joanne Jordan on numerous occasions and I feel that you have been particularly unfair in the way that you have treated this person. Based on the evidence stated on your blog if you do not wish to go and see a psychic then you simply do not go. It’s your choice you choose to go and have reading, when I last looked we all had the freedom of choice. The person then chooses to take away from that what they wish. Who are we to argue that spirits do not exists or the comfort that readings provide when loved ones have passed away. Jo is the last person that would involve herself in anyone’s life unless asked to do so. Jo has never pushed anything onto me in the time that she has been reading for me. I would totally recommend Jo as a reader and I would not let this man’s cynicism cloud your judgement as he clearly does not know what he is talking about and should therefore not cause distress to anyone. We are all entitled to our own opinions and the question is should we keep them to ourselves Simon!!
Phillipe:
Unfair in what way? Why did I visit Joanne Jordan and ask for a reading? She advertised that she had psychic powers. That’s a claim worth checking out.
I allowed her to demonstrate them (most of her customers do not do this as they allow her to cold read). By claiming she was in touch with my dead father (who is alive), she proved conclusively that either she cannot tell the difference between being in contact with a spirit and her imagination, or that she tells lies. What other conclusion can you draw?
By telling me that “someone is not telling the truth” in reference to a close personal relationship, she also demonstrated that she is willing to tell people things that could potentially ruin their relationships.
When people make claims that are untrue, and can be shown clearly to be untrue, and are quite willing to cause harm then I have no problem in exposing them for what they are.
If I visited Joanne Jordan and she demonstrated psychic powers, I would have blogged this too. It would be incredible.
Have you actually listened to the MP3?
Simon
I have viewed with interest the comments being posted and your responses.
Referring to the purpose of the site, I think it’s fair to say that anyone prepared to publicly expose themselves with extreme opinions and comments, as you have, highlights a distinct lack of integrity, education and compassion.
In the first instance, you disgraced yourself by accusing someone of being “fraudulent or deluded”. Casting a comment so degrading and disrespectful would only be used by anyone, with a reasonable level of decency, in the extremist of cases - and only then, when a considerable amount of research and evidence would support and justify such a remark. By your own admission, a brief reading from Joanne Jordan and no doubt other mediums led you to use these words. Why, if you claim only to be interested in the facts, do you spend little time obtaining them?
It also seems you are quite content to rest your obtruse opinions behind certain so called protective barriers – i.e., you insist on being called a “sceptic” not a “cynic”.
Do you understand what this implies?
You are foolishly playing with words Simon without understanding their true meaning. You once again demonstrate a lack of accurate research and add further doubts to your integrity.
To quote:- Pat: I think you've confused scepticism (looking at the evidence and taking an opinion based upon it) with cynicism (rejecting everything).
Whilst your basic knowledge permits you to feel comfortable with a precise division of your understanding of the words, ironically both true definitions seem to fit perfectly with your profile:-
A sceptic is one who doubts the possibility of real knowledge of any kind. A person of skeptical temperament is unconvinced of the truth of a particular fact or theory.
A cynic is one who sarcastically discredits the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions. One who is churlish (person of low birth: peasant: ill-bred) incredulous (unbelieving) and sneering (expression or suggestion of derision or disparagement).
My advise to you is:- Shut that big mouth of yours – Dump your conceited arrogance - Get an education – Learn how to research properly – Understand the implications of Scepticism – Stop making a public fool of yourself - Show more respect to yourself and others - Stop forcing your juvenile and limited opinions on people and GROW UP.
As Sole Anderson would say “Do it now Dude”
Perhaps when you realise how out of order you are, you will offer a public apology to Joanne Jordan and others you have targeted.
Patrick Davison
Patrick:
I'm not sure you could call my opinions "extreme" seeing as they are completely in line with current scientific thinking.
"Why, if you claim only to be interested in the facts, do you spend little time obtaining them?"
The amount of time I spent "obtaining the facts" was small, but adequate to demonstrate the point.
When Joanne Jordan was claiming to be in communication with my dead father (who is alive), she conclusively demonstrated that on at least one occasion she is willing to claim to be in contact with the dead when we know she cannot be. If what I discovered when I visited Joanne Jordan went against current scientific thinking, then yes - it would be worth significant further research. Seeing as it fits perfectly in line with current scientific thinking then I'm not sure it's worth further research. I'm happy to do further tests though if Joanne Jordan is willing.
I'd be the "person of skeptical temperament" according to your definition.
I call myself a "sceptic" because I believe that scientific scepticism is the best method of figuring out what is true.
I'm sceptical of psychic claims because (i) I have looked at the evidence for psychic powers with an open mind and come to the conclusion that I should provisionally reject the claim, and (ii) if new evidence comes to light that is stronger than the current evidence against psychic powers, I will change my mind.
What evidence would make you change your mind Patrick?
With regard to the apology, it is quite easy for Joanne Jordan to prove me to be wrong. I'll even give up my free time to help her design a test that enables her to prove me wrong. There is nothing that excites me more than the possibility of being wrong, if she does have genuine psychic powers that would be amazing to me.
If she passes the test, I'll happily apologise.
Hello Simon
My name is Tim and I happen to be Joanne's son in law.
I know you will just wave my comments off and say i'm biased but for you to say my mother in law is evil shows you have make the worsed character evaluation in history!
I have never known anyone more caring and selfless in my entire life.
Comming from someone who would go on some personal vendetta of character assasination I think it laughable.
Tim:
OK, I think that's a fair comment Tim.
While I'm unsure whether this is self-delusion or an outright scam, it wasn't fair for me to use this word. I've removed the word from my original post.
Still, I do think there is something morally wrong in not putting your claims to the test before charging people money for them - especially when you are telling people "someone's not telling the truth" in relation to a personal relationship. That could really cause a lot of harm.
Simon.
I have had several readings with Joanne; I have never had to ‘give’ her any of my personal details regarding my life, my family or my past.
The information I received from Joanne during my readings would have been impossible for her to obtain anywhere else, it being intensely private and not something that would even be discussed with best friends!.
I have recommended Joanne to many of my friends and colleagues in the past and will continue to do so.
And just for the record, I do not consider myself to be deluded!!
Linda: See response above dated 12 October 2008 09:40. I've covered this point already.
Hi guys, my name is Jon, and I own and run the UK's largest and most respected sceptical site www.badpsychics.com
It seems many of the people who have left comments here are unaware of the tricks psychics use.
They dont need to research you, some do, but in general they dont need to. Cold reading is enough to convince most people, especially those already willing to believe.
I am also interested at how instead of people critisising Simons words and experiences with Joanne, they instead resort to childish insults, hardly love and light is it guys.
On my site we have looked at so many psychics, we pride ourselves on being able to show anyone how any reading has been achieved.
I challenge ANYONE on here to provide me with a recording of a reading i cant explain.
You guys need to remember that anecdotes are not evidence, they are just stories of something that happened.
Many times i have listened to anecdotes of readings which sounded amazing, yet when i actually listen to the reading myself its a much different story.
People make things fit, they forget the misses and concentrate on the hits.
Even with Joanne Jordan, we took the recording supplied by Simon, we spent hours transcribing it and then analysing it, just to show people the truth behind such things
http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=852
Read that article, hell even her son in law, read it, learn the truth about her.
Maybe she is deluded and believes in it all, or maybe she is a crook.
Either way the evidence is right in front of you and anyone with a critical thinking and open mind can see that Joanne is no more than a typical cold reading wannabe.
I have just passed my first test!!! As you know I have been doing what I call "Stone" cold readings - where I announce up front rather than afterwards that it is all bullshit.
I was in a hippy new-age shop to buy some Tarot cards (props) yesterday and did a read on the moronic sales assistant: overheard a brief conversation he had with a colleague, planted a few suggestions in the small talk and then went to work. Got a higher than average strike rate and even though I explained exactly how I did it, he refused to accept the reasons and thought I had a "gift" and that I was in denial about it. You can do nothing for these morons and I don't wish to. But I am feeling fucking smug!
Simon,
Interesting to see you have been embarrassed to realise the term “Evil” was too strong a word to use and subsequently removed it from the site. Would you like to explain the reasons why you chose to use this word in the first place?
Patrick Davison
People posting on here to defend this reading obviously have no knowledge of cold reading and basic human psychology which these alleged psychics use.
Joanne told him if he responded he'd get more out of it, why should that make a difference? If she can channel a Father who isn't really dead then I'm sure she can piece together the information she thinks she is receiving in her head. I think it would be worth the believer's time to look up Barnum and Forer effects to see how these people work.
For the record I have no problem calling someone like Joanne evil.
To rape the memory of the dead is a crime, and a sick one in my book.
ANYONE who charges someone to speak to their own dead relative who isn't really there, is evil in mybook.
It is a downright dispicable act, and I think the word evil is applicable in this case.
Jon Donni
www.badpsychics.com
Pat you seem quite an angry person and have taken umbrage at someone attacking, as you see your beliefs. This is natural but perhaps consider the insidious actions psychics practice. They prey on the grief stricken and the vulnerable. In my appreciation there 'gift' is no more than delusion or fraud. I come to this opinion in an open frame of mind, considering the evidence. I have yet to see evidence of a true psychic but I am open minded enough to accept it if the evidence presents itself. Your anger derives from your close minded approach. You are too willing to believe and do not accept alternative or seek other explanations. I also think Joanne ranks low in cold reading abilities which any person can do with practice.
Having listened to the recording it's clear that Joanne Jordan's reading failed. I can think of three reasons why this might have happened:
1. She had an off-day. It happens to everyone. If this was the case then perhaps she would do better in a second reading? Simon has already stated that he would be happy to have one, and it would give Joanne an opportunity to prove herself.
2. Simon's sceptical mind was somehow blocking her mental powers (the same problem that Uri Geller suffers from).
3. Simon was preventing the use of cold reading by refusing to give her information about himself.
So which one do you think it was? Or are there other reasons I haven't thought of? I'm particularly interested to hear the responses of the believers.
This woman failed to do what she claims she can. In fact, she did more than that...she basically admitted she can't do what she claims unless the sitter provides all the answers.
Hmmm.....
You people that supposedly have so much faith in her (all family are you?), open your minds to the reality of what's happening. She's fake or deluded. Probably a bit of both.
I've listed to a number of readings before, and that ranks amongst the worst.
You all behave like a bunch of moronic psychopaths that target individuals with futile attempts to hold them to ransom. Good luck. 50% of people in this country believe in the spiritual world. Who really cares if you do or not!
Joanne Jordan has nothing to prove. Knowing Joanne as I do, she is extremely unlikely to enter in to any ridiculous contest with anyone, particularly sceptics! What is the point?
A sceptics mind is already made up, so don’t try and fool anyone by leading them to believe you are anything other than a herd of hungry animals hunting in packs.
As it happens, I do not believe in the spiritual world, but enjoy the occasional card reading to stimulate my curiosity. As I have previously stated, Joannes accuracy is uncanny. Put that down to which ever source of information you wish.
Yes it’s true to say her recorded reading was very poor, but hardly surprising when you consider the sort of vibes Simon Perry was giving her, not to mention his intimidation.
He wouldn’t have been that brave with me.
Again Simon, would you like to tell me why you originally used the term “Evil” to describe Joanne?
Seems to me that Joanne Jorden does
have something to prove, as she has asked friends and family to come on here and defender her.
So tell us Pat Davison, where did you get your information from stating that 50% of people in this country believe in cold readings, or is it just the case that like cold readings you make it up as you go along
Pat,
You are seeking explanations as to why Simon used the word evil, then go on to call those who wish to disbelieve 'moronic psychopaths'. As I stated before you are angry because you beliefs are being challenged. You say you do not believe in the spiritual world but you will give payment to a psychic where the techniques are well established tricks. Would you believe Derren Brown has a 'gift' because he could provide you with accurate information in the same way a so called psychic could.
Of course this could all be dismissed as entertainment if these psychics did not charge money for there 'gift' but all we see is repeated exploitation of the weak, vulnerable and the grief-stricken for profit. Now evil is a strong word but what would you call con men who prey on elderly people and trick them out of money? In my mind they are the same. Now I am sure Joanne is a nice person but her act is a sham which she should recognise. It would be nice if you could take a deep breath and debate with us. I kind of think you know the truth and the truth hurts.
Originally posted by: Pat Davison
"You all behave like a bunch of moronic psychopaths that target individuals with futile attempts to hold them to ransom."
Nice insulting there Pat, Im sure you win many arguments using that childish ad hominem tactic. Pray tell exactly how a sceptical and accurate report on an experience, is designed to "hold somebody to ransom"?
"Good luck. 50% of people in this country believe in the spiritual world. Who really cares if you do or not!"
You get those statistics from where? or is that another guess? I suppose if you do not care for people who do not believe in "the spiritual world", then conversly those people should not care about your opinion also? Fairs, fair right?
"Joanne Jordan has nothing to prove."
She claims to how powers, do you think she is exempt from demonstrating such powers when challenged? Why does she have this privilege?
"Knowing Joanne as I do, she is extremely unlikely to enter in to any ridiculous contest with anyone, particularly sceptics! What is the point?"
Yes I understand, she cannot prove she has any supernatural ability, what would be the point of pretending she has? Oh yes, now I remember, its for £35 quid a pop isnt it?
"A sceptics mind is already made up, so don’t try and fool anyone by leading them to believe you are anything other than a herd of hungry animals hunting in packs."
Clearly you lack the intelligence to distinguish the difference between a "sceptic" and a "cynic". May I suggest you purchase a dictionary instead of paying for readings? Please feel free to completely ignore this advice, I mean coming from a "hungry pack animal" and all.
"As it happens, I do not believe in the spiritual world, but enjoy the occasional card reading to stimulate my curiosity."
justification for idiocy?
"As I have previously stated, Joannes accuracy is uncanny. Put that down to which ever source of information you wish."
I will. Its cold reading, thanks.
"Yes it’s true to say her recorded reading was very poor, but hardly surprising when you consider the sort of vibes Simon Perry was giving her, not to mention his intimidation."
Vibes and intimidation? Ok firstly there is no such thing as negative vibes. Yes you can feel discomfort if you are in the presence of a person in a bad mood, but this is an emotional response. It is not some actual physical energy that radiates from the person. I also thought simon was quite cool calm and collected, I did not sense any hostility at all, so where exactly was the intimidation? She certainly didnt sound intimidated to me.
"He wouldn’t have been that brave with me."
Yes, I am sure you would have anecdoted him to death.
"Again Simon, would you like to tell me why you originally used the term “Evil” to describe Joanne?"
Maybe because psychics, mediums, tarot card readers, psychometrists, reiki masters and all the other assorted fraudulent or credulous people who charge people money for imaginary benefits are infact evil. Con artists pure and simple. Whether this is intentional fraud, or credulousness is irrelevant.
simon
I don't feel equiped to comment on the moral rights and wrongs of what Jo does for a living.
However, Jo informs me that she never charged you a penny for your reading and would never charge anyone that was not completly satisfied.
Don One: Of course she couldn't charge me; she was caught red handed not being able to supply the service she promised. She does, however, charge money if she is able to fool her customers into believing she has psychic powers.
It’s not a question of whether or not her customers are satisfied, she is fooling them into being satisfied.
Pat: I used the word "evil" originally because Joanne is exploiting gullible people for money while they are grieving. She may think she’s got real powers, or it may be a deliberate con – I don’t know. For some people, the word “evil” may imply that Joanne Jordan is deliberately intending to do evil. I removed the word to avoid people making this misinterpretation.
I should highlight though, that by this misinterpretation it would also be unfair to describe the 9/11 hijackers as evil. They too almost certainly believed that what they were doing was morally righteous. Their only mistake was their gullibility in believing specific passages in the Koran. Which leads me to the moral of the story: check your facts.
Been reading these comments with interest. Posters seem split 50/50.
To sumamrise the comments there are 3 possible scenarios.
1. Joanne is a faker.
2. Joanne is genuine but had an off day.
3. Simon's negativity affected the reading.
1. Can be easily proved/denied. If Joanne is genuine she would have no hesitation in arranging a second reading with Simon. Failure to do so is proof enough for me that she is a fake.
2.If a second or third reading is given and is more successful it will prove Joanne simply had an off day.
3. The hard core believers out there will of course point out that any reading with Simon will fail because of his aura. If so I would like to know why this is so.
As I understand it Mediums communicate direct with spirit or through their guide, they don't channel it through the sitter. In which case why does it matter how the sitter feels?
I am neither believer nor sceptic (although by definition I suppose if i'm not a believer then I must be a sceptic) I prefer myself to say I have an open mind. Surely though even true hard core belovers must accept that some psychics ae not genuine but simply con artists jumping on the badn wagon. It happens in all walsk of life you get genuine as well as cowboy builders for example. Surely it'd the duty of believers to expose frauds who discredit the psychic movement. I'm not saying Joanne is one of these but she owes to everyone to prove otherwise by holding a second reading.
Hi Simon,
Just like to say well done. What an excellent blog.
For my money, you have clearly demonstrated that an alleged 'psychic' tried and failed to use cold reading techniques and pass it off as a psychic reading.
I always find it funny how these 'psychics' need so many questions answered and a lot of feedback from the mark, I mean customer, to be able to provide information back.
Surely, a real psychic could get every bit of information they need from the dead they are alleged to contact?
Although in your case, it would have been better if Joanne had just used the phone to call your dad. Lol!
First class blog! To those saying it was "unfair" on Joanne, perhaps you could elaborate on HOW it was unfair?
The woman is clearly cold reading, or at least attempting to, very badly. The rubbish she is spouting could apply to half the population of the planet.
I'm delighted to hear your father is alive and well.. I'm sure he does want to apologize, probably for not being dead!
How ANYONE can fall for this crap is beyond me.. those of you defending this lunatic need to check yourself into the nearest psychiatrist, because you are clearly as barmy as she is!
As an afterthought, having read a little deeper, I feel I must address one of Pat Davison's comments, that she "has nothing to prove", I believe she does, and so, apparently, does the law.
I was a nurse for many years. Would you have felt completely comfortable if I performed a surgical procedure on you, if I hadn't proved myself capable, and earned my diploma? Or would you prefer someone turning up at the nearest hospital and telling them "I'm a nurse, honest guv"? Of course not. No one practices medicine, or nursing without qualifications; proof that they are up to the job.
So called, and self professed, "psychics" should be equally accountable, as the emotional damage they can do often far outweights the physical damage my hypothetical bogus nurse might do.
Great post Simon and well done. Nothing in the reading suggests she is a genuine psychic. It seems to be full of guess work, misinformation and cold reading. The questions that has to be asked is whether she is a scam artist or genuinly believes in her own abilities. If it was merely an off day then it must have been a hell of a day. Thanks for alerting us and nice one.
Well done Simon. Joanne - you are a charlatan or a loony. Do your worst. Oops - you've already done it.
Quite a rant mylo.
Did you listen to the reading?
Do you have a point to make other than anecdotes and insults?
You could perhaps start by explaining why, if she is for real, she told me she that she was in contact with someone who was alive.
Perhaps you could also explain why, she told me my relationship was full of lies.
You said you visited her. What steps did you take to prevent cold reading? Did you record the reading so that you aren't reliant on that unreliable human memory that cold readers are known to exploit?
Have you read the comments that have already explained what cold reading is?
If you've got a point to make, let's hear it. Pointless insults are boring.
Hmmm - Simon, at all times in this running commentary, you have remained calm and factually answered all the relevant legitimate (& illegitimate) points, while Joanna's supporters seem to have devolved into insults and rants.
Bravo on your patience, Simon.
I have had a reading from Joanne Jordan and many other psychics in the past.
She was very accurate and did not fish for information from me, I only confirmed information when it was provided and was spot on.
This is not an exact science, and any communication that does take place is not on the same level of communication experienced between people who are alive.
You are often provided with images, thoughts and need to decipher the message. We are spirits enjoying a physical life, and not living beings waiting for a spirit life.
All will be revealed to believers and non-believers a like when you pass over.
Did you realize not unlike a star we are energy, and that energy cannot be destroyed. It is said that we have all part of the big bang from the creation of the universe inside of us.
Don't be too quick to dismiss and make fun of things you don't necessarily understand, there are many things that science cannot prove, and this is one of them.
Closed minds and closed results I'm afraid. For all of you who are non believers you will be in for a shock one day.
Chris
Simon,
I like many others, when reading this blog, admire your patience and rational thought when being faced with unfair, defensive insults. Your test was clearly scientific and logical. There is no possible rational way in which someone claiming to be able to speak to a specific dead person can communicate with that 'spirit' when that person has not even died. It is ludacris and irrational to suggest that she was having an 'off day', as no matter how unfocused that person may be, they simply can not say that they are speaking to a non existent dead spirit without being either deluded or puposefully lying.
It is funny the lack of reason and intellegence these desperate defenders of Joanne Jordan are. This is narrow mindedness at its pinnacle. I admire your persistence and patience when investigating psychic claims, and replying to the the gullible half-wits that defend blatent fraundulent/deluded psychics.
Craig
Please will people learn the meaning of scepticism. - "cough" Pat
Simon -m I suspect that you have some ulterior motive to down Joanne's powers - Tim she is your mother in law - well I will say this - I lived with Jo for over 3 years and found her to be a deluded woman who thougt she was above everyone else in whatever she did - whether it be her so-called physic powers or the fact that she thought she was the best singer in the world.
What can I say other than get over it she is no more than a fake and I have the details to prove it it if you want them!!
It had to be a man making these derogatory remarks about such a lady as Joanne Jordan, What are you scared of Simon, why are you such a 'fake', maybe you are deluded.
Actually i don't insult people so I take that back...
What do you get from being a fake, anyone who sees a medium does so because they want to, no one forces you to go but you should leave well alone for those who do.
I visited Joanne Jordan about a month ago and she was absolutely amazing. So amazing my reading went on for about 2 hours, and it was taped and quite honestly there was no way she would know anything about me or my life. She then went on to read my daughter and again she was spot on.
There are all sorts of mediums out there and I have seen a few at shows and they can be 'way off' but I dont think Joanne Jordan is in that category.
I would class Joanne as one of the best and as I only met her once I don't doubt her psychic powers for one minute.
On the other hand if you go with intention of lying to her a making up your 'life' what satisfaction do you get and why try to damage someone with such terrible claims, do you have other issues here. I wonder.
I hope when you come to your senses you give Joanne Jordan a public apology because she deserves one.
@anonymous well, you have the recording of my reading - perhaps you could post the recording of yours so we can all decide for ourselves?
I am not anonymous because I want to be, I just don't know how to open a google account. I now have the benefit of having listened to your reading. I think she was spot on, she picked up straight away that someone was being childish and about to have a quarrel with someone,she said someone is not telling the truth, Simon she sussed you straight away! You should try your little scam on someone else and I think you would get the same response. You were out of order... "you have to guard yourself and not reveal all", she said.... what more proof do you need. Listening to this, you were the fake at this reading and probably if you had responded you would have found out the truth, don't you see what you did. It's laughable really.
I wouldnt post my reading on here because it is too personal and not something i wish to share with you or the general public, but i would like to ask you how she would have known things about me that i hadn't shared with anyone....one thing i will share with you.... my father died just before i was born, i have been brought up by a great man who has been my dad for most of my 51 years here, I dont even think of him as not being my dad but the first thing Joanne Jordan said to me was that she had my 'real' dad here, (my description not Joannes) she knew his name and my circumstances.... can you explain how this would be when I hadn't spoken about him or even thought for one minute I would have a reading where he would come along.... Is that the work of a fake... I don't even come from the same town as Joanne so she couldnt know anything about me...and there were things she knew about my daughter which only my daughter and I had shared... how would she know that... If you can give me some scientific reason why she could tell me all the things she did as a fake then please try and explain as I would be interested to know...
I am not defending Joanne because if I thought she was a fake then I would agree with you.... there are some mediums out there who do need investigating and shouldn't be allowed to exploit people but i think they are blatanly obvious, I really don't think Joanne is one of them. I think it is a brave thing you do to make such a claim.
@Anonymous
You say you're only anonymous because you don't have a Google account, but you still didn't leave your name.
Interesting that you pick up on the "childish" thing. I'm not sure I'd class an interest in investigating claims as childish, but I suppose children are very curious. There are two things to note about your mention of this. Firstly: retro-fitting. At no point did Joanne Jordan state that she was referring to me, she just mentions "childish" and expects me to provide the real information. It would be extremely rare if someone could not think of a situation in that someone was acting childish. That's part of the way that "psychics" work - they give you a vague description of something that would apply to everyone and the punter then fits it to a real situation and gives the "psychic" the credit.
The other thing I find telling here is that you are willing to use this extremely vague statement as evidence of psychic ability, but not willing to give any credibility to the evidence that goes against your existing belief. She claimed to be psychically in touch with someone who was alive. To do this, she was either (a) lying, or more likely (b) she does not have the ability to communicate with the dead yet believes she does.
In answer to the question about your father, of course without being or even hearing the recording I cannot say.
Have you re-listened to the recording? It is worth playing it back again and making notes with a pen and paper. Write down exactly what information you give her and what information she gives you. Write down the exact words as the information is given.
Human memory is terrible at memorising conversations, and "psychics" exploit this to their advantage.
What you may find, for example, is that she may have said something like "I'm getting someone who died a long time ago" and you filled in the blanks by adding the information about it being your father.
It is very common for people to leave readings where this sort of thing has been said and been completely convinced that the information came from the psychic. Human memory isn't nearly as good as most people believe.
I should note that this is just one explanation, in my view the most likely one, but there are other techniques too.
Could you listen to the tape, making notes and let me know if this is the case?
Hi Simon, sorry didnt give my identity, my name is Jane Smith,(really) I have listened to the tape since I went to see Joanne and still feel the same but I will listen to it again
Can I ask you something, do you think all mediums are fakes or just Joanne Jordan, I'm a bit confused.
What I would say is yes your father is alive (god bless him) but you lead Joanne to believe it was your father, maybe if you had been honest with her you may have had contact from someone who wanted to speak to you. What I mean is... every medium I have seen, even Derek Accorah says they like you to speak to them so they can hear your voice and that it keeps the spirits there... and communication should be a two way thing. If you had gone with an open mind and not with a ploy to 'expose a fake' you might have had a very different view.
I only found your blog by accident
and its been going for over a year and you're still managing to attract comments, I think that shows what a 'touching' subject this is and how strong the feelings are on both sides. For people like you, you will not know until it's your time to leave this earth. I just wish you would open your mind and try again.
Are you living in Lincolnshire, there's an excellent medium at the Blackfriars in Boston tomorrow night (Sunday) - Shaun Dennis - now he is amazing, I would love you to come along and see if he's a fake too.
Hi Jane,
I don't even think Joanne Jordan is a fake - I'm not 100% sure, but if I had to place money on it I'd bet that she believes she has psychic ability.
In terms of whether I think psychic power exists: I've gone to four different psychics now, and have not seen it yet. Also, an awful lot of psychics have been tested by organisations like JREF under controlled conditions and they've never managed to find a psychic with genuine ability. And finally, there are several magicians such as Derren Brown who have studied how cold reading works. When they've faked psychic readings to illustrate the point, people leave as convinced that they've been in contact with loved ones as you are - even more so.
The methods used by psychics (which are often not used deliberately) are very well documented. Perhaps the best book on this is Ian Rowland's Full Facts of Cold Reading . I highly recommend reading this before visiting a psychic again - being informed about the ways you can possibly be deceived is key to going with an open mind.
So in light of the above, I find it unlikely that psychic ability exists.
There are two ways of being close-minded about psychic ability. First, you could believe they're all fakes without looking at the evidence and not go and visit one at all. The second way is to go to the psychic believing from the beginning they are real.
The open-minded way is to visit a psychic without having first decided if they are for real or not. Before you go, educate yourself using books like Ian Rowland's one to understand how you could be fooled. Make sure when you visit the psychic that they can only gather information by psychic means and not by cold reading techniques.
This sets up a clear test that they can pass or fail. That's the open-minded method of doing it.
If you visit a psychic and allow them to cold read, you will not know when you leave whether they had genuine ability or they were just cold reading. If you leave a reading deciding it was genuine without at least learning about the alternative explanations and accounting for them, then I don't mean to offend - but I do think this is close minded because you are ruling out one of the possible explanations in order to maintain your belief.
I'm actually down in Leicester, so it would be a fair trek to get up to Boston tonight.
I did do one psychic visit recently where I did not go to test, but I went to deliberately expose a fake. It will be in my column for the Leicester Mercury probably either on Wednesday or 2 weeks on Wednesday. I'd be interested to get your opinion on whether you think I was right to expose this person in the local paper. If you send me your email address by this form and promise not to leak the article, I'll email it to you.
Finally - please do re-listen to your reading with an open mind (which includes considering the possibility that you were fooled) and making notes. I'll be very surprised if you find that a lot of the information you currently think you were told by Joanne Jordan didn't actually come from you.
Okay Simon you have my attention now, (Jane Smith) I am going to give you two examples of fake and real mediums, based on my own experience.
They both took place at the Guildhall in Grantham this year. The first in February was Shaun Dennis... I was going to leave at the interval because I wasn't convinced it was real but my daughter wanted to stay. In the second half he said he had a woman who wanted to contact someone who worked for the City Council, Grantham is a town as you know, but the 'spirit' was adamant it was the city council. I worked for Sheffield City Council for 15 years, but I was thinking it could be for anyone, he then gave the names of both my brothers and my sister, then he said whose Jane in the audience. In the end I put my hand up, he then went on to say I how I missed my sister as she had moved far away, we live 3 hours away from each other now, he said we shared a special date was it our birthday, by this time I was believing him, my daughter Rachael and my sisters daughter Hanna, share the same birthday, Hanna was born on Rachaels 19th birthday. There were lots of other things and from then on I believed.....you can read the full article on Shaun Dennis's website under testimonials, Jane and Rachael Smith.
Later this year we went to the Guildhall again to see a woman whose name I won't give at this stage, (it wasnt Joanne Jordan). THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE.... my daughters boyfriend was with us, (he doesnt believe either), he is black and wears all the bling, he has a ganster image, although he is a professional photographer and lovely gentle guy who wouldn't harm a flea. Anyway the medium came to him and said he wasnt from Grantham, she said he was from Nottingham, (he actually lives in London), she then asked who drove the black car, possibly BMW with the blacked out windows, he said he didnt know anyone like that, which was the truth, she assumed he was from a city because of his image and she assumed he drove a vehicle with blacked out windows.
There was lots of other things and not just with my daughters boyfriend, and no one really got any information from her.. that is the difference between a real medium and a fake.
I have been told things from mediums and in no way they could know anything about me.
I know you cant come to Boston but you really should see Shaun Dennis, I think you may change your mind.
Just one last question Simon, what do you think happens to us when we die.
Jane
Simon I have read your article, I wont expose the details but I think it was a different thing entirely, and yes you did on this occassion do the right thing, he was truly a danger to people and taking advantage through fear, entirely different to Joanne Jordan.
I still cant agree with you on Joanne!!!
Jane Smith
@Jane,
I'm not sure that when you compare these two psychics that you describe a fair test.
There are two mainstream explanations for Shaun's ability. Firstly, he could have genuine psychic powers. Secondly, he could be using cold or hot reading or a combination of both.
For the sake of simplicity, let's assume these are the only two explanations.
For you to be confident that Shaun falls into the first category (real psychic powers) you must first eliminate the second possibility. But nowhere do you describe how you did this.
If you understand how cold/hot reading techniques work (seriously, read the book) and also understand a bit about human memory, you'll realise that if someone went to a self-proclaimed psychic who was good at using these techniques, you would expect them to have exactly the sort of experience you describe.
Try this: (I'm assuming you haven't re-listened to the tape yet) write down a list of things that you remember Joanne Jordan telling you. Ignore statements about people's feelings and intentions, you want to be looking for objectively factual statements like "your father died before you were born".
Once you've done that, re-listen to the tape with a pen & paper. Note down exactly which bits of the information were said first by you and which were said first by Joanne Jordan. Be very wary of questions "Is this your father?" isn't a statement - it is asking you for information.
If you work hard to be objective, I expect you will find that a lot more information actually came from you than came from her.
When listening, also write down every statement she makes that was original together with if it was correct.
Please let me know what you find.
Thanks,
Simon
I can't re listen to my tape because for some strange reason it seems to have diappeared. I know it sounds convenient but I will find it and listen to it.
So you do believe in psychic powers, please answer my question, what do you think happens to us when we die
@Jane,
I await the results of your listening with notes.
I have not seen any reliable evidence that suggests we may be able to live on after death. On the opposite side, there is a mountain of evidence that shows our thought processes are the product of our physical brain.
This suggests to me quite strongly that if your brain is dead, your thought processes can no longer continue.
Not really new to my ears.
my parents who after my sisters death went to find peace through these mediums,,They found out that ALL of them are con artists and relieved them of a fair few pounds running into hundreds..They should all be charged with obtaining money by deception....They are the lowest of the low to pick on easy marks like the grieving...If it was up to me they would all be in jail for fraud as all they are up to is COLD READING..... learn about it and save all your hard earned money
Patrick - I feel your comments are somewhat biased - after all are you not her partner and therefore cannot be in anyway or shape objective - from my limited knowledge of Joanne, having lived in the same village for a number of years, I always found her to be an attention seeker even down to trying to gain sympathy by making the most lurid accusations against many men, including her own father an her ex-husband - she is a fake and nothing more for the sake of money
Simon, as far as I can tell you are the biggest load of nonsense which we should all be fighting against. Have you nothing better to do with your time, perhaps I might make a suggestion for you, How about getting yourself a life! You are totally unable to make a decision about the authticity of Joanne Jordan being a psychic medium as you are a complete non beleiver and are totally biased. You only see things from your own perspective you have a closed mind. I feel sorry for you. On the day of your reckoning, what will you list as your lifes work?? Done anything worthwhile? Done anything good and honest? Done anything to help humanity? I don't think making your life's work trying to assasinate someone's good character a worthwhile and good pasttime. You are a pathetic person with a grudge and an axe to grind, pity you and all your followers you are sad individuals. You will get your wakeup call one day, nothing is as sure as that.
Simon:
Unfortunately, the recording seems to have been removed from:
http://www.mediafire.com/?tg1mcmgwwa0
"File Removed for Violation of Terms of Service"; don't need to be a clairvoyant to guess what happened.
Could you please put it back somewhere? I'd love to listen to the nonsense spewed...
And don't think for one second you did anything wrong. You did not.
It's also on YouTube:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
I have seen this lady meany time and alwaya felt she was very good and every think she as told me as been true and been or happend every one as folts and some people just have nothing better to do then try and hurt others by bullying one year my mothers partner at the time just walk out and never come back the police couldnt find him my mother was goin out her mind so first time she seen Jo to.see she couldnt have a ancer yes she told Jo.bout him missing but we could not bleave what she told.us she told us were he was how he got there what root he when that he safe he was not well and she was spot on bout every think now if she was fake how would she no i can under stand that u had a bad reading but u need to be open just a bit so she can work with u just like other clairvoyants my name is Amy short by the way also can i just say out off the hundreds off people that have seen Jo you are the only one that had had a bad reading and you can say what you like you like but people who been to Jo well no she is no fake or evil woman
I know jo very well! I didn't know the extent of this as she always plays the victim and manages to manipulate every situation. She's studied psychology amongst other things, preparing the ground for her subterfuge no less.
A crazy woman believe me. Claims benefits left right and centre. Has no morals and is totally bonkers. Lies and cheats her way thru life. She is no more able to speak to the dead than I am. Its,all a load of bollocks.
This woman is,a fraud. She preys on peoples sadness and weakness. I notice all the ppl defending her are her deluded family,and current boyfriend.
She would have made assumptions based on your misfortune I'm sorry you were conned.
You are not her son in law so that's a lie and you practically live off her so very biased comments
You idiot
I second that! Shes as fake as her hair extensions! Alleged son in law, Tim......dim........current victim, pat.........prat
Post a Comment