Edgar Cayce

[sleepyhead]

Hello,

After seeing several threads about Joseph Smith and the book of mormon I want Edgar Cayce to have equal time. He was more recent than JS and he had many people investigating him.

Question for debate.

Was Edgar Cayce able to obtain information through non traditional means?

I will be taking the position that he did.

[JoeyKnothead]

Hello,

After seeing several threads about Joseph Smith and the book of mormon I want Edgar Cayce to have equal time. He was more recent than JS and he had many people investigating him.

Question for debate.

Was Edgar Cayce able to obtain information through non traditional means?

I will be taking the position that he did.

Where and when?

Witnesses? Witness reports?

Images? Audio? Video?

Peer reviewed work?

Other confirmatory data not listed here?

[sleepyhead]

Hello,

After seeing several threads about Joseph Smith and the book of mormon I want Edgar Cayce to have equal time. He was more recent than JS and he had many people investigating him.

Question for debate.

Was Edgar Cayce able to obtain information through non traditional means?

I will be taking the position that he did.

Where and when?

Witnesses? Witness reports?

Images? Audio? Video?

Peer reviewed work?

Other confirmatory data not listed here?

Hello Joey,

EC lived from 1877 to about 1945. He started giving readings when he was a teenager but these weren't saved. Most of the saved readings were given from 1923 until he died in Virginia beach, VA.

There were many people who witnessed him giving readings but there wasn't really much to see. It was just a conductor asking questions and him answering while in a subconscious state. Many of his readings were medical in nature therefore the witness would probably be the doctor and patient. These had a hign success rate.

There's really nothing to show except for typed information on a wide range of subjects.

By peer review I suppose you mean other psychics. Many psychics have a great deal of respect for EC.

After the book "there is a river came out he became famous and many people came to expose him. They were given unhindered access and many formed the opinion that he was on the level.

[Nec Spe Nec Metu]

Hello,

After seeing several threads about Joseph Smith and the book of mormon I want Edgar Cayce to have equal time. He was more recent than JS and he had many people investigating him.

Question for debate.

Was Edgar Cayce able to obtain information through non traditional means?

I will be taking the position that he did.

Where and when?

Witnesses? Witness reports?

Images? Audio? Video?

Peer reviewed work?

Other confirmatory data not listed here?

Hello Joey,

EC lived from 1877 to about 1945. He started giving readings when he was a teenager but these weren't saved. Most of the saved readings were given from 1923 until he died in Virginia beach, VA.

There were many people who witnessed him giving readings but there wasn't really much to see. It was just a conductor asking questions and him answering while in a subconscious state. Many of his readings were medical in nature therefore the witness would probably be the doctor and patient. These had a hign success rate.

There's really nothing to show except for typed information on a wide range of subjects.

By peer review I suppose you mean other psychics. Many psychics have a great deal of respect for EC.

After the book "there is a river came out he became famous and many people came to expose him. They were given unhindered access and many formed the opinion that he was on the level.

You haven't actually said anything. Where is your evidence?

Present it cleanly, if you would. By this, for starters, I mean: present peer-reviewed scientific journals. In lieu of this, present some peer-reviewed psychic medium journals published on the subject.

If none are available to present to we, the public, please elaborate on why this might be, and why we are to reliably believe that Edgar Cayce had extraordinary attributes such as those described.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 3:

EC lived from 1877 to about 1945. He started giving readings when he was a teenager but these weren't saved. Most of the saved readings were given from 1923 until he died in Virginia beach, VA.

Please present these readings for examination. Particularly, the readings you consider most compelling.

There were many people who witnessed him giving readings but there wasn't really much to see. It was just a conductor asking questions and him answering while in a subconscious state. Many of his readings were medical in nature therefore the witness would probably be the doctor and patient. These had a hign success rate.

Please present an example of the subject producing a valid medical diagnosis - having never seen nor met, nor any any way conversed with patient or doctor - while he was subconscious.

Also, please present pertinent doctor / patient data, and any medical records as you deem evidential.

There's really nothing to show except for typed information on a wide range of subjects.

This man did all this wild and wacky stuff, but wouldn't ya know, there ain't hardly a thing to show for it.

I am not in the least bit surprised.

By peer review I suppose you mean other psychics. Many psychics have a great deal of respect for EC.

If that psychic's totin' around a phd in the relevant field he seeks to discuss, then by all means, let's see what he has to allow. Beyond that, no, I was referring to reputable scientists trained to study and assess the various claims presented by (you, or) our subject. Of course this is not the only possible means of supporting all this, but surely it'd help if we could.

I have no doubt psychic's'd wanna recognize the best in their field, much as WWE recognizes its talent with a belt.

Please present relevant data regarding the rate of success our subject had in his endeavors.

After the book "there is a river came out he became famous and many people came to expose him. They were given unhindered access and many formed the opinion that he was on the level.

Argumentum ad populum.

If all of us thought the moon wasn't there, would it suddenly cease to exist?

[sleepyhead]

Hello,

Here's part of what you asked for.

The following starts on page 16 of Edgar cayce investigations under "favorable evidence".

Link

Sorry for some reason I can't copy and paste.
"One of the more unusual aspects of Cayce's medical clairvoyance is its recognition by physicians with whom he worked. ... Sherwood Eddy conducted a survey of eleven doctors who cooperated with the readings. Two handled too few cases to participate but the other 9 gave answers that were consistently favorable about the accuracy of diagnosis and the efficiency of treatment. ... A new york physician who treated 100 patients with readings by Cayce estimated the accuracy at 80%.

[Goat]

Criticisms about the methodology of the Cayce believers, and the way they get their statistics can be found here

http://www.skepdic.com/cayce.html

[Question Everything]

Hello,

Here's part of what you asked for.

The following starts on page 16 of Edgar cayce investigations under "favorable evidence".

Link

Sorry for some reason I can't copy and paste.
"One of the more unusual aspects of Cayce's medical clairvoyance is its recognition by physicians with whom he worked. ... Sherwood Eddy conducted a survey of eleven doctors who cooperated with the readings. Two handled too few cases to participate but the other 9 gave answers that were consistently favorable about the accuracy of diagnosis and the efficiency of treatment. ... A new york physician who treated 100 patients with readings by Cayce estimated the accuracy at 80%.

I read the whole thing, and it looks to me like Cayce said a lot of things, some of which turned out to have merit, others turned out to be nonsense. I don't see how he did any better than he would by simply guessing.

[sleepyhead]

Criticisms about the methodology of the Cayce believers, and the way they get their statistics can be found here

http://www.skepdic.com/cayce.html

Hello goat,

Thank you for the response. It is much easier to respond to an article than to
look for all the information that the others requested. There was some doubt in my mind whether all the stuff they wanted would have any significance anyway. Now going through randi's comments which have to do with methodology and how they get there statistics.

>>>A stenographer took notes during his sessions and some 30,000 transcripts of his readings are under the protection of the Association for Research and Enlightenment. (A DVD-rom of the readings is avaiable.) However, Cayce usually worked with an assistant (hypnotist and mail-order osteopath Al Layne; John Blackburn, M.D.; homeopath Wesley Ketchum). According to Dale Beyerstein, "these documents are worthless by themselves" because they provide no way of distinguishing what Cayce discerned by psychic ability from information provided to him by his assistants, by letters from patients, or by simple observation. <<<

In the early days he did work with the above physicians but they were not his assistants. They earned there money through there medical practice and not from Cayce. After he became famous he gave readings for individuals all over
the US. The 11 physicians I mentioned in my earlier post lived in different areas of the country. Some letters gave information and some didn't. Some came to him for the reading and some merely wrote letters asking for help.

>>>In fact, however, the support for his accuracy consists of little more than anecdotes and testimonials. There is no way to demonstrate that Cayce relied on psychic powers, rather than the placebo effect, even on those cases where there is no dispute that he was instrumental in the cure.<<<

The above comment "instamental in the cure" and the claim of the "placebo effect" appears to acknowledge that the information provided by EC in many cases provided the information needed for the cure. Many of the patients went through the more traditional means of healing prior to either them or there physician contacting EC. Traditional medicine didn't work in these situations. If Randi claims that they were healed through the placebo effect why didn't the placebo effect work when the doctor gave them traditional medicine?

>>>It is true, however, that many people considered themselves cured by Cayce and that's enough evidence for true believers. It works! The fact that thousands don't consider themselves cured or can't rationalize an erroneous diagnosis won't deter the true believer. <<<

They determined his accuracy rate to be about 80%

>>>Defenders of Cayce claim that if a patient has any doubts about Cayce, the diagnosis won't be a good one. <<<

Randi is fudging on the truth here. When a reading was shown to be wrong they investigated to determine why it was inaccurate.

>>>Cayce's defenders provide some classic ad hoc hypotheses to explain away their hero's failures. For example, Cayce and a famous dowser named Henry Gross set out together to discover buried treasure along the seashore and found nothing. Their defenders suggested that their psychic powers were accurate because either there once was a buried treasure where they looked but it had been dug up earlier, or there would be a treasure buried there sometime in the future (one wonders why their psychic powers didn't discern this).<<<

This also is untrue. As with all reading which appeared to be inacurate they attempted to find out why. This particular incident is covered in "the outer limits of EC power". They don't claim readings are accurate when they weren't. They look for why they were inaccurate.

[Goat]

Criticisms about the methodology of the Cayce believers, and the way they get their statistics can be found here

http://www.skepdic.com/cayce.html

Hello goat,

Thank you for the response. It is much easier to respond to an article than to
look for all the information that the others requested. There was some doubt in my mind whether all the stuff they wanted would have any significance anyway. Now going through randi's comments which have to do with methodology and how they get there statistics.

>>>A stenographer took notes during his sessions and some 30,000 transcripts of his readings are under the protection of the Association for Research and Enlightenment. (A DVD-rom of the readings is avaiable.) However, Cayce usually worked with an assistant (hypnotist and mail-order osteopath Al Layne; John Blackburn, M.D.; homeopath Wesley Ketchum). According to Dale Beyerstein, "these documents are worthless by themselves" because they provide no way of distinguishing what Cayce discerned by psychic ability from information provided to him by his assistants, by letters from patients, or by simple observation. <<<

In the early days he did work with the above physicians but they were not his assistants. They earned there money through there medical practice and not from Cayce. After he became famous he gave readings for individuals all over
the US. The 11 physicians I mentioned in my earlier post lived in different areas of the country. Some letters gave information and some didn't. Some came to him for the reading and some merely wrote letters asking for help.

>>>In fact, however, the support for his accuracy consists of little more than anecdotes and testimonials. There is no way to demonstrate that Cayce relied on psychic powers, rather than the placebo effect, even on those cases where there is no dispute that he was instrumental in the cure.<<<

The above comment "instamental in the cure" and the claim of the "placebo effect" appears to acknowledge that the information provided by EC in many cases provided the information needed for the cure. Many of the patients went through the more traditional means of healing prior to either them or there physician contacting EC. Traditional medicine didn't work in these situations. If Randi claims that they were healed through the placebo effect why didn't the placebo effect work when the doctor gave them traditional medicine?

>>>It is true, however, that many people considered themselves cured by Cayce and that's enough evidence for true believers. It works! The fact that thousands don't consider themselves cured or can't rationalize an erroneous diagnosis won't deter the true believer. <<<

They determined his accuracy rate to be about 80%

>>>Defenders of Cayce claim that if a patient has any doubts about Cayce, the diagnosis won't be a good one. <<<

Randi is fudging on the truth here. When a reading was shown to be wrong they investigated to determine why it was inaccurate.

>>>Cayce's defenders provide some classic ad hoc hypotheses to explain away their hero's failures. For example, Cayce and a famous dowser named Henry Gross set out together to discover buried treasure along the seashore and found nothing. Their defenders suggested that their psychic powers were accurate because either there once was a buried treasure where they looked but it had been dug up earlier, or there would be a treasure buried there sometime in the future (one wonders why their psychic powers didn't discern this).<<<

This also is untrue. As with all reading which appeared to be inacurate they attempted to find out why. This particular incident is covered in "the outer limits of EC power". They don't claim readings are accurate when they weren't. They look for why they were inaccurate.

Now, how did they come to that conclusion?? Can you provide a methodlogy that they came up with that number?? I mean, there are a lot of flakes and believers out there that don't know how to accurately evaluate that kind of evidence, and they let their confirmation bias get in the way.

What kind of scientific training did this folks have? How does that answer the criticism that many of the believers would count a hit if a prediction was mostly wrong, but has some vague similarity to what they thought was correct??

Sorry, but none of what you said answers the criticisms.