I don’t like to think that all psychics are blood-sucking ghouls feeding on the misery of others. Some of them certainly are, while others probably honestly think they have powers, but are self-deluded.
You be the judge.
Jaycee Dugard was a little girl when she was abducted. For nearly two decades she was kept prisoner and abused in horrible ways. However, unlike so many stories like these, she recently turned up alive. Of course, psychics tried to "help", giving clues as to where she might have been. Dugard’s parents even paid psychic Dayle Schear for her advice, which, shockingly, did not help find Jaycee.
That hasn’t stopped Schear from claiming success. In an all-too-rare critical article, skeptic Ben Radford takes this so-called "psychic" to task, pointing out all the stuff we skeptics know, but the general public never seems to maintain a hold on: psychics give vague descriptions that are so generic they can always be retroactively fitted once the real facts are known, and utter bland positive messages that again are one-size-fits-all.
Radford does a good job pointing this out, and how psychics never seem to actually help. As he writes:
If Shear’s psychic powers told her that this poor girl was being kept in the most horrific conditions – being subjected to continual sexual and physical abuse for nearly two decades – then it’s puzzling that Jaycee was not found 18 years ago.
Ya think?
Tip o’ the tin foil beanie to Kitty.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:25 am
Psychics are about as useful as a one-legged man in a kick-ass contest.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:26 am
Basically, this psychic told Jaycee’s mother that she would return alive. Since there are only two possibilities (she’d return alive or be found dead), the psychic had a 50-50 chance of being right. Hey, I can make a few 50-50 guesses too and then claim that the right ones are proof of me being psychic. I predict that betting on Black on the roulette wheel will win you money. What? You didn’t win? Well, you must not have bet at the right time. Just keep betting over and over and eventually my prediction will be proven right.
By the way, Schear is now predicting that Jaycee will “recover with counseling and be a spokesperson to help others.” That’s a pretty obvious one too. People who have been through this tend to have lots of counseling (in fact, IIRC, she’s getting counseling already) and can recover to a degree. (Schear can claim being right no matter how much recovery she makes.) People who have been through traumatic events also tend to become “spokespeople” for others going through that. They’ll write books, speak at engagements, etc. So if Jaycee does any of this – even if she just gives one TV interview – Schear will claim being right again.
I can do the “predicting the obvious” too. I predict that Dugard’s captors will be put in prison for a long time. Where do I pick up my official “has psychic powers” badge?
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:43 am
Strange how none of these “psychics” ever do that well at investing in the stock markets. You’d think that would be the natural way of exploiting their strange gifts.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:02 am
Or picking Lotto numbers….
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:03 am
Dara Ó Briain on psychics:
“If there were any in it, it would be a significant genetic advantage for them to become more sexually successful over the last 2000 years and we would evolve to the point where there were many many of them.”
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:05 am
“I don’t like to think that all psychics are blood-sucking ghouls feeding on the misery of others”
I knew you’d say that.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:08 am
I don’t know if there’s a similar program in the US but in the UK there’s a cooking/challenge type program call “Come Dine With Me”. Basically the premise is that the contestants each host a dinner party throughout the course of a week and after the party, the guests all vote on how successful the night was. At the end of the week the winner wins a grand.
One week, one of the contestants was a “psychic”.
Now, cooking ability aside, I’m quite amazed that she just didn’t predict who wouldn’t enjoy her night and alter the menu accordingly…
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:18 am
Also, TechyDad, if Jaycee doesn’t recover with counseling and become a spokesperson, Schear can conveniently decline to mention that. The media are not likely to follow up and take her to task. Except here.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:23 am
I think I’d start by filing a charge of concealing evidence of a crime. Then, if Schear claimed she had no evidence, I’d add a charge of fraud. Pity the prosecutor’s office doesn’t have more resources.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:29 am
Reading Ben Radford’s article, I found it interesting he mentioned the “psychic detectives” shows on CourtTV – I think a few of those episodes showed up on either the Discovery Channel or A&E (both becoming more and more misnomers). My wife would watch those shows all the time and it was all I could do to keep from screaming, opting instead to leave the room.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:42 am
Hey, watching a good cold reading for entertainment purposes only is really fun. But guys like this need to be lit on fire.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
I knew you would make a post about psychics this month.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:51 am
I saw my grandfathers death ten years before it happened. I did nothing to prevent it from happening. If I had warned him, and he survived, then I wouldn’t have been psychic. Anyways who would believe a five year old? And my father told me to be quiet so as not to upset him. Let me prove to you that I am psychic. There is a car in your driveway. No? Your neighbors driveway. No? On the street outside. No? In the neighborhood. See!!!
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
I propose a simple test to weed out the true psychics from the charlatans.
Simply walk up to the front door of his/house. If it has a doorbell -> FAIL.
A true psychic would simply know you’re coming…
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:02 am
Good one MKR!
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 am
Umm, black on a roulette wheel is not 50/50. On American wheels, there are two green spaces: 0 and 00 and 36 other spaces. This makes the probability 18/38 = 47.3%.
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:27 am
I’m reminded of Harmon Leon’s experience working as a telephone psychic for Phillip Michael-Thomas’ Psychic Reader Network:
It’s quite funny. See [world-wide-web dot langston dot com]/Fun_People/1996/1996BPO.html for the full article.
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 am
I ran across this the other day while looking for new pictures of Neptune.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/astrologicalmusings/2009/08/the-jaycee-lee-dugard-case.html
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:36 am
@Matt,
I actually thought of that as I was posting, but the only other “50-50″ prediction that came to mind was political in nature and I didn’t want to set off any political debates. I figured that the roulette wheel prediction was close enough to 50-50.
@Cheyenne,
A psychic lottery number prediction would probably run something like this: “I see an eight, a seven, a three, a five and a two. Some of the winning lottery numbers will contain one or more of those digits.” I don’t have the time to do the math, but I wonder how many digits a psychic would need to pick before their prediction topped 50-50 probability of being right?
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:11 am
TechyDad, #18:
5?
Seriously, though, definitely pick a “1″ as one of the digits. That’ll cover 11, 12, 13…
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 am
Dara Ó Briain on psychics:
“If there were any in it, it would be a significant genetic advantage for them to become more sexually successful over the last 2000 years and we would evolve to the point where there were many many of them.”
True, but if they all looked like a certain famous Montel guest…, (that shall remain nameless) Ewwwwwwwww!!!!!!!! They would be extinct!
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:29 am
I predict that an apologist for psychics will come to this thread, possibly via a link or something like that, and try to defend this psychic or others.
Maybe a male, or a female, or a gender we can’t determine because of the name.
Further, I predict that they will use an argument so far beyond logical that it curves around and falls beneath logic.
This will happen sometime during the duration of this thread.
(Of course, if that actually doesn’t happen, I can always claim victory for my non-psychic prediction. Right?)
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:42 am
I misread this “psychic”‘s last name as “Schmear”…must’ve been thinking of “schmuck”.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:50 am
Read an laugh (or cry)
http://www.drryles.com/B.html
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:51 am
There is a connection that can be deemed ‘psychic phenomenon’ Largely it is not something that is consistent enough for psychics to be peddling it. Sometimes they sense things, other times they got nothing.
African tribe women instinctively know when to start boiling water for the Men who have been out on a hunt that can last anywhere from a few hours to as long as a week. When asked how they know, they simply reply that they can tell. My dog moves to the entrance gate and begins barking and whining about 5 minutes before I arrive home (my schedule is not set and the hours I return vary greatly) She senses my return before any clues are available to her (her sniffer isn’t that good lol)
My neighbor’s mother whom I have known for 40 years awoke one night with a start, sat up in bed and said “Rob” who is her son and was attending college 15oo miles away. She didn’t know specifically what had happened just that something was wrong. An hour later she got a call from the hospital informing her that her son had been in an accident and was stable but had cracked some ribs and broken his nose. Science says this is impossible, but events like these occur quite often.
This is hardly the group to embrace that certain things are unexplainable to current scientific understanding. This entire website spends all it’s energy on the false premise that current scientific understanding is 100% correct and true.
We are only at the beginning of understanding the cosmos, much of what we believe to be correct today will be shown in the future to have been incorrect / misleading or incomplete. That is science.
So we return you to your regularly scheduled program of calling new theories pseudo science instead of what they often are (protoscience) I for one am keeping an open mind no matter how often the entrenched/funded tier II scientists prefer which is unfortunately often keeping the mind closed to new ideas.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:59 am
I would argue that this is a lousy a priori choice, and even worse compared with actual statistics. A priori people alive tend to stay alive (say, ~ 0.1 % chance of death at 20 years of age) and people dead tend to stay dead. :- D That would be ~ 99 % or so chance of being right.
Likewise, a posteriori statistics IIRC shows that most disappeared people return. (With dropping probability as time goes on, to be sure.) Still more than 50 % chance, if called on early enough.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Bahdum (aka Richard) wins!
PS. Torbjörn, I believe that the likelyhood of someone turning up alive after 18 years are significantly smaller than 50:50.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:25 pm
@ btownsailor:
Thanks for confirming our psychic read on this thread, see for example Richard’s comment.
What you just did is committing two basic fallacies called “cherry picking” (see later) and “cum hoc ergo propter hoc”:
In your case:
Argument: People or animals start to prepare for encounters before encounters. Encounters happen. Therefore, the encounters are causing the preparations. (Never mind the problem of “backward” causation here.)
Problem: The possibility of encounters means people will have expectations, resulting in both preparations and encounters and their correlation in time.
The cherry picking is of course forgetting about all the times when the preparations weren’t as well correlated or when the timing was worse, thus artificially sharpening both the correlation and its distribution. Bad, bad, bad “method”, wouldn’t pass the first course of statistics!
Those of us who lives in the real world instead prefer to not open our minds so carelessly that the brain falls out.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Bahdum (aka Richard) said:
“I predict that an apologist for psychics will come to this thread…This will happen sometime during the duration of this thread.”
About half an hour later, btownsailor said:
“There is a connection that can be deemed ‘psychic phenomenon’ …Science says this is impossible, but events like these occur quite often…So we return you to your regularly scheduled program of calling new theories pseudo science…”
I am therefore convinced that Richard is, indeed, psychic. Perhaps Phil can fast-track his application for the Million Dollar Challenge?
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Pieter, yes the likelihood drops towards zero, as I implied. Dugard were one of the exceptions.
I don’t think that changes what I wrote, it seems generally valid to me. But anyway in this case, didn’t Radford write “18 years ago”, implying that the physic turned out his/her “prediction” immediately after the disappearance?
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
@OtherRob,
Actually, I just did the math and it’s much less than 5. If you take NY’s Lotto as the example, you have 6 numbers to pick, each from 1 to 59. If you choose 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 for your “psychic digit prediction”, 15 of the 59 numbers (over 25%) will contain your chosen digit. If a number with your digit is picked, your prediction is correct. If it isn’t picked, then your odds actually increase that the next number selected will have your digit (since there’s one less “miss” number available). The percentage goes up to almost 28% by the end.
Now, if you pick two of those digits (1 – 5), you have 28 of the 59 possible numbers covered. That’s almost 47.5%. If the first number doesn’t have your digits, the next ball’s probability is 48%. Then 49%. Then 50% even.
Thus, I hereby predict that this week’s NY Lotto numbers will contain a 3 or a 5.
As a side note, if I pick 3 digits from the 1-5 selection, then my probability begins at 66% and tops out at 72%. Picking 4 digits begins me at 81% and winds up at 89%. Picking 5 digits is a sure thing. You start off at 93% and wind up at 100% before the final ball is drawn.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:41 pm
@Torbjörn Larsson, OM,
True, if this psychic said she’d return alive just after her disappearance, then the odds were (at least initially) in the psychics’ favor. There’s something else to consider too. Someone is paying you to provide them with a “psychic reading.” Do you give them reason to despair (“Your daughter is ali…. oh my god… Ok, she’s dead now.”) or do you give them reason to hope (“She will return to you.”)?
If you give them reason to despair (especially if you indicate that the missing person isn’t alive anymore), they might not want to come back to you. If you give them reason to hope, they might come back to you every time they need more hope. (“Yes, I see her. She’s still alive and well and trying to find a way to contact you. Please try back here in two months.”)
Psychics fall into that category of “Things I really wish were true, but just aren’t.”
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
“This entire website spends all it’s energy on the false premise that current scientific understanding is 100% correct and true.”
Scientific understanding changes daily. Ergo it would be rather difficult for any scientifically literate person to make such a laughable assertion.
“I for one am keeping an open mind no matter how often the entrenched/funded tier II scientists prefer which is unfortunately often keeping the mind closed to new ideas.”
Let’s review. Scientists are closed minded because they consider the evidence for a phenomenon, and based on that evidence come to a conclusion that their is insufficient reason to assume that said phenomenon violates the laws of physics. Whereas people like our illustrious poster are open minded because the KNOW that the phenomenon is supernatural, and no amount of evidence for possible natural explanations will ever sway them from this certainty.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:51 pm
@btownsailor,
I don’t think any scientist would tell you that our “current scientific understanding is 100% correct and true.” Of course, that doesn’t mean that scientific understanding is highly flawed either. We’re constantly improving our understanding every day. For some topics (e.g. evolution), we have a pretty high degree of understanding of the general operations of things, even if some of the details are up for discussion. In other fields, the door is wide open for any theory that comes along.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Evidence?
Are you kidding? We talk about stuff like that all the time. Dark mattter is unexplainable to current scientific understanding. Gravity at subatomic distances is unexplainable to current scientific understanding.
Either you’ve never read this blog before or you’re lying.
Also, it’s “its”.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
28. Torbjörn Larsson, OM Says:
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Argument: More cows die in India in the summer months. More ice cream is consumed in summer months. Therefore, the consumption of ice cream in the summer months is killing Indian cows.
Problem: It is hotter in the summer, resulting in both the death of cows and the consumption of ice cream. [Wikipedia]
____________
Also – about 50% of Indian adults are lactose-intolerant, which would substantially reduce the potential for subcontinental ice-cream consumption. Just FYI.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:57 pm
And the well Duh award of the day goes to….
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
@24. cpt Jameson Lave de Reorte
In what “University” would one even GET “a PhD in Transpersonal Counseling” or “a Masters degree in Metaphysical Science”???
Just reading the phrase ‘Transpersonal Counseling’ makes my brain hurt.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:17 pm
“Dugard’s parents even paid psychic Dayle Schear for her advice…” Sorry if this sounds like I’m nitpicking this otherwise excellent article, however, every article I’ve read on this subject seems to be repeating the above claim as if it’s fact. The truth is that the only one who has made this claim is Schear, herself. Hardly a disinterested source. I’ll believe it when I hear it from Dugard’s parents.
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I remember watching a TV programme about those dogs that get up, walk to the door and bark just before their master’s return. They decided to install cameras in the house and watch the dog over several days. It turned out that the dog got up walked around and barked every 5 minutes.
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Sir Eccles,
Nice
I’d love to find that though.
The other question to the btownsailor who says his/her dog comes to the gate 5 minutes before his arrival, is it literally 5 minutes? How do you know if you haven’t arrived yet? Can the dog see you as you walk down the street?
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:46 pm
btownsailor said,
Baloney. Please cite the source of this claim. What “African tribe?” Who performed the study? What were the testing conditions?
Baloney. How many times a day does the dog go barking at the gate? How do you know the dog doesn’t hear the car from 3 blocks away? What type of signal is transmitted from you to the dog? What organ in the dog receives that transmission? Have you set up a simple video camera for a day to actually test your hypothesis?
Baloney. How many events like these occur under truly repeatable and testable conditions? How many times every single day do people get, “a feeling that something just happened to someone,” when nothing actually happened to that person? Science doesn’t say this is impossible. Science says, “Show me the evidence in a controlled, repeatable setting.” Your stories and anecdotes are NOT evidence.
Let me repeat that: Anecdotes are NOT evidence. For every story you have that something amazing and unexplainable happened, I have 100 stories that say nothing amazing whatsoever occurred.
Actually, I’d call in Non-Science, or nonsense for short. And I am completely open minded. As soon as you provide the evidence of your claims, I will change my mind.
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
*pats himself on back*
*instant back spasm*
*yelps at pain*
Yep, I knew it.
Should I tour the nation giving “hope” to the hopeless and thereby increasing my wealth because of their gullibility,…er, I mean openmindedness? Nah! I’m not a professional ghoul like John Edward and Sylvia Brown(e). I don’t think I have a ghoulish bone in my body.
My thanks to btownsailor for making me correct. You and other like-minded individuals make the market viable for shysters such as Edward and Brown(e). They couldn’t do it without you.
Anyone else here see Derren Brown’s take on cold reading? It’s on YouTube and a fellow skeptic is using it as a platform to illustrate how cold reading is used. And when it comes to cold reading, Brown does a far better performance than Edward or Brown(e).
September 2nd, 2009 at 5:00 pm
The links, for those of you not used to searching for mentioned YouTube vids.
Derren Brown’s “Cold Reading”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G18NfN76bAs
dprjones’s “How to do cold reading – how to be a fraudster – Part1″: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iBwhgbFvnw
September 2nd, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Lots of people trying to sound smart in this thread.
September 2nd, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Psychics sometimes say “She will return to you”. The psychic can claim a hit dead or alive.
September 2nd, 2009 at 6:02 pm
@ Damon:
I think most of them are doing a decent job of coming across as thoughtful and skeptical about extraordinary claims, myself.
September 2nd, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Thanks for providing some balance then Damon.
September 2nd, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Regarding psychic dogs, I believe the dog in question to be Jaytee and its owner Pam Smart that were featured on the Channel4 documentary series Equinox. The episode in question Secrets of the Psychics was first broadcast on 24 August, 1997.
http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/animals/pdf/comment.pdf
Quote:
“We filmed him continuously over a three hour period and at one point we had the owner randomly think about returning home from a remote location and yes, indeed, Jaytee was at the window at that point. What our videotape showed, though, was that Jaytee was visiting the window about once every 10 minutes and so under those conditions it is not surprising he was there when his owner was thinking of returning home.”
September 2nd, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Re: the dog “sensing” arrival claim.
My dog does this also. She gets excited and starts whining and yipping for a good minute or so before one of three people arrive: me, my wife, or our mid-day dog walker.
I am 100% convinced that she does sense us before we arrive or are even in sight. I have witnessed it (e.g. while working at home, when the dog walker arrives).
The sense is called “hearing”. Dogs have *way* better hearing than you imagine.
The hypothesis was supported about a year ago when my wife got a new car. For the next couple weeks my dog did *not* “sense”my wife coming home until she started walking up to the door. After a few weeks though she got used to the new sound and could pick her up from just as far away.
QED.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Ken,
You should probably read the research before proclaiming you’ve solved the dog “sensing” arrival claim via “hearing”. Otherwise you kinda look…unscientific.
QED.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Oh, for crying out loud! Will someone please kill this zombie of a cliche that being open-minded somehow equals blindly believing everything you hear?! Drives me nuts.
Most scientists ARE open-minded. Heck, most of them would love to see a genuine, repeatable, verifiable example of psychic ability. It would be incredible! It would be a whole new field! But when put to the test, over and over and over again, the claims psychics make are proven wrong, hoaxes, or just simply no better than guessing.
Greg In Austin’s simple question, “Have you set up a simple video camera for a day to actually test your hypothesis?” says a lot. People who believe these stories do not want tests. To actually run a test wouldn’t be “open-minded”, it would be sceptical (in the pejorative sense) and cynical and jaded. Because only people with closed, doubtful minds would try to objectively prove something that they already know is true in their hearts. Right?
Wrong.
An open mind means open to new ideas, but it doesn’t mean you have to accept them unthinkingly. I’m open to new foods, too. Heck, when a vendor in Korea sells me a cup of silk-worm larvae, I give them a try. But when someone hands me a rock and tells me to eat it, I’m not going to swallow it just on their say-so. Even if they tell me their friend’s mother swallowed one, and lived to be 114.
With that kind of open mind, you should probably start spending your savings now, because I hear that after 2012, you won’t have much more use for them.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I don’t know about dogs barking BEFORE their owner arrives but mine never bark when I arrive, as long as they recognize the sound of my vehicle. Now, when I drive a different vehicle, they go balistic,,,just as soon as I pull into the drive. Guess they’re not really in tune with their Dog,,,er, I mean God.
Gary 7
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:25 pm
In Dog We Trust
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 am
Is it just dogs that are psychic? My cat Copernicus knows when I’m coming home. About the same time every day he’ll wait by the door or check every 5 minutes or so until I get there. Then again, if I come home early and I am vewy vewy quiet I can sneak in and the “OMG, where’d you come from” look is just priceless.
Maybe the psychic abilities of animals is only turned on for an hour or so a day?
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:47 am
No. 25, 40, etc.:
Many years ago, I was lodging with a family; they had a dog, who was especially fond of me. Every time I arrived home ( when others were already there, not only when the dog was alone ), the dog would get up and bark excitedly, half a minute or so before I reached the door. ( Her owners claimed that she had a special “welcome bark”, reserved exclusively for me. )
I once visited this family, several months after I had ceased lodging with them. Even then, the dog knew that it was me, before I reached the door.
The dog wasn’t tall enough to see out of the windows, so she couldn’t see me coming. So does this mean the dog was psychic???
NO – it doesn’t! The simple, rational explanation is that, with the acute sense of hearing common to all dogs, she was able to identify each member of the household as they approached, by the unique sound of their footsteps on the gravel path.
Occam’s Razor, folks!
September 3rd, 2009 at 9:07 am
@btownsailor,
When my wife was in labor with our first son, I headed away from her for a few minutes to have lunch with my parents. After lunch, my father made a quick stop in the gift shop to buy something for his grandson-to-be. As he shopped, I got more and more nervous and felt like I needed to be with my wife *NOW!* Sure enough, when we got there, everyone but me and my wife’s mother were kicked out because she was ready to push.
Was I psychic? Of course not. I got nervous because we were delaying when I knew it was a time sensitive situation. Had I gotten there and she wasn’t ready to push, I would have likely forgotten all about the nervous “must get there now” feeling. However, since my hunch turned out to be correct, it sticks in my mind. I’m sure I’ve forgotten dozens (if not hundreds) of similar feelings which wound up being incorrect. That would place my prediction rate at around chance. By forgetting the missed calls, though, my prediction rate is artificially inflated to the point where it looks “psychic” in nature.
@Owen,
I’d agree with everything but this: “With that kind of open mind, you should probably start spending your savings now, because I hear that after 2012, you won’t have much more use for them.” I’d have said “With that kind of open mind, you should send me all of your savings because I have some great investment opportunities for you.”
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
“I don’t like to think that all psychics are blood-sucking ghouls feeding on the misery of others”
You’re correct, the rest of us are flesh-eating ghouls feeding on the pain of others.
Bwhahahahaha….
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Shane (55), at least your cat recognises your footsteps or car. Our cat doesn’t like anyone that doesn’t live in the house. This would make him a good attack animal but for his chronic cowardice. As a stranger approaches he growls and then, as the stranger gets closer, runs away still growling. I have arrived home from work to be told by an amused wife and daughter that as I came up the steps, the cat was growling because it was dark and he didn’t recognise me. Psychic animals? Maybe, but mine isn’t one of ‘em.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:56 am
I believe that Psychics are sensitive to vibrations that are invisible to most people.
As they are able to receive these vibrations, they must be absorbing them somehow.
Therefore the best use of Psychics is as reactor shielding.