zulumoose wrote:The thing to keep in your head is this:-

If anyone COULD actually pull off this sort of thing, can you think of any good reason why they would not seek credible verification? It would be very easy to find scientists who value their own reputations enough so that if they cannot debunk you they will seek advice and further confirmation from colleagues, so that by the time it goes public it is virtually undeniable.

Surely any scientist in an appropriate field who is worth his salt would be interested in trying to debunk something a colleague had been forced to ask for help with.

wakawakawaka wrote:hello there everyone I need some help debunking, there was this woman Johanna Michaelsen whom claimed that she had worked with a "real" psychic surgeon, and not ones debunked by randi, named pachita whom was able to cut people supposedly without any blood and transfer livers and other organs. And later Johanna claimed that all this pachita stuff was actually satanic! so can anyone help me with some debunking of this woman's claims? ive found some stuff and pictures of pachita online supposedly doing her surgeries and i dont know if she was just faking with these,but i would really like some help from people on this forum with a small investgation

Ihavenofingerprints wrote:

People who claim to have a redundant supernatural ability need not to be debunked, when you can just demonstrate how inefficient their ability is. You can cure thousands of people several times over by training real surgeons, compared with a few random people using these psychics.

zulumoose wrote:

Ihavenofingerprints wrote:

People who claim to have a redundant supernatural ability need not to be debunked, when you can just demonstrate how inefficient their ability is. You can cure thousands of people several times over by training real surgeons, compared with a few random people using these psychics.

This response makes no sense to me.

Investigation of a real ability like this could potentially have massive benefits, to dismiss it as less efficient than surgery is very short sighted.

That is comparable to numerous examples in the past where a new discovery has been dismissed at first as less efficient. The aeroplane, for eg, was easily dismissed as not worth the effort, and lacking practical use. So was the telephone.

Of course this is all hypothetical, since there is no credible evidence being presented that these 'abilities' are anything other than con artistry.

zulumoose wrote:The thing to keep in your head is this:-

If anyone COULD actually pull off this sort of thing, can you think of any good reason why they would not seek credible verification? It would be very easy to find scientists who value their own reputations enough so that if they cannot debunk you they will seek advice and further confirmation from colleagues, so that by the time it goes public it is virtually undeniable.

Surely any scientist in an appropriate field who is worth his salt would be interested in trying to debunk something a colleague had been forced to ask for help with.

wakawakawaka wrote:i dont know why but that Michaelsen story always seems to bother me around novermber, and i was wondering, do you guys have any advice on just trying to stop the bothering stress from this story?

I think it might be the fact that i met someone who claims to know pachita's grandson whom claims to have the "gift" and said he could give me contact with him! is this is a chance to try and expose this person, or should i just forget about it?

theropod wrote:Ask yourself what about this bothers you so much, as we surely can't really know this.

Keep telling yourself it's a hoax. One among many.

RS

Onyx8 wrote:Yes.

wakawakawaka wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:Yes.

well i guess everytime michaelsen try to claim how impossible it would be for all these people to be lying and have such a simluar tesitmony i guess i need to remind my self how much more impossible her story is especially one backed up by para-psychologists whack-jobs