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
Anonymous said…
She is too fat to fit on the video screen.
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.
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...
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.
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...
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...
Anonymous said…
My take on this episode: http://middleagedboy.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/why-i-dont-think-sally-morgan-hears-voices/

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

Why I won't be voting Labour at the next General Election, not even to 'keep the Tories out'.

I have always voted Labour, and have often been a member of the Party, campaigning and canvassing for them. For what it’s worth, here’s my feeling about voting Labour next General Election:   1. When the left vote Labour after they move rightwards, they are encouraged to just move further right, to the point where they are now probably right of where e.g. John Major’s Tory party was. And each time the Tories go further right still. At some point we have got to stop fuelling this toxic drift to the right by making the Labour Party realise that it’s going to start costing them votes. I can’t think of anything politically more important than halting this increasingly frightening rightward slide. So I am no longer voting Labour. 2. If a new socialist party starts up, it could easily hoover up many of the 200k former LP members who have left in disgust (I’d join), and perhaps also pick up union affiliations. They could become the second biggest party by membership quite quickly. Our voting

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