Skip to main content

Sally Morgan reported as covertly receiving information on stage

FROM THE RTE RADIO ONE WEBSITE, TODAY

Monday 12th September 2011

Listen Back

"Sue went to see psychic Sally Morgan last night in the Grand Canal Theatre. She was great in the first half but during the second half Sue began to hear somebody talking loudly at the back of where she was sitting. She thought it was somebody heckling but she soon realised that everything he said Sally was repeating on stage. He would say a name like David and she would repeat it onstage. Other callers who were also at the show tell of similar experiences."

Can be heard this week on listen back here (you need realplayer). Scroll down to "Liveline podcast- Psychic".

My thanks to anonymous.

£40 a ticket. "There were people there that were really grieving". Confirms my earlier suspicions. Here's a video of her doing her highly lucrative thing a while ago.

Comments

tina bowyer said…
When me and my mom saw her last year there is no way she would have known what she told my mom she is amazing in our eyes
September 12, 2011 at 8:32 PM
Anonymous said…
She is too fat to fit on the video screen.
September 13, 2011 at 12:35 AM
bail bonds las vegas said…
I would imagine that most of the psychics have to have some sort of "edge" or deceptive technique to employ....or they're out of a job really fast.
September 13, 2011 at 2:42 AM
Adzcliff said…
Brilliant! I watched the video clip first, and assumed that I was watching a cherry-picked episode of lucky cold-reading (i.e. a 'Luke' that's initially met with a pause, becomes an audience member's daughter's boyfriend's friend - and is being looked after by the audience member's Dad?? Hasn't he got his own deceased relatives?). But then she did plump for a 'young' Luke, and the reading didn't need to stray elsewhere in the auditorium (which was always an option if need be). Hot reading makes much more sense now, but I guess you always assume that such blatant fraud is too much for the majority of psychics and their staff? Perhaps I'm being naive...
September 13, 2011 at 7:54 AM
Stephen Law said…
I am not sure about the clip - whether it's hot or cold or bit of both. But I have long suspected Morgan uses hot reading and other research pretty extensively (see me other posts on her). If she does, that of course places her firmly in the deliberate fraud category. In which case my contempt for her would be considerable - charging £40 a pop to manipulate and deceive grieving relatives.
September 13, 2011 at 8:00 AM
Stephen Law said…
I imagine Morgan would justify her act by saying it makes people happy, comforts them, etc. So everyone benefits. Nothing so very wrong with that...
September 13, 2011 at 8:07 AM
Adzcliff said…
Thanks for that Stephen.

Perhaps she'd also have no problem with me charging £40 a pop at selling my left over ('magic') vegetable soup to my gran as a treatment for her arthritis; or as a monthly rate for the title of 'friend' to my learning disabled neighbour; or as a discounted rate for decorating a blind man's house (the original blue, is now a lovely modern shade of red - honest!). I find it amazing that fraudulent psychics would probably find the above abhorrent - even though everyone benefits - but are fine with telling the bereaved that the voice in the head is their dead relative, rather than their colleague.

Anyway...
September 13, 2011 at 8:54 AM
Anonymous said…
My take on this episode: http://middleagedboy.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/why-i-dont-think-sally-morgan-hears-voices/
September 14, 2011 at 1:12 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se
446 comments
Read more