Email Correspondence Between Brough Perkins and Spencer Marks of IIG

From: Brough Perkins

To: Spencer Marks

September 13, 2007 9:35 AM

 

Dear reader,

I read an article featuring your org. on badpsychics.com. It was interesting and I was intrigued by your panel of volunteer professionals who donate time and effort to investigating certain psychics. I am a young man from Canada who has had some media exposure. My media exposure was a fluke as it turned out clients of mine happened to work in Television.

 

I have been doing psychic readings for nearly ten years, since I was fifteen and I believe in psychic ability and the afterlife.

I have some hesitation around contacting you as you seem to perceive psychic ability as being "paranormal" or "outside the realm of normal".  If there are non-physical dimensions to our universe and the nature of consciousness is not produced by the brain, rather independent of physical matter then I think Psychic ability and the Afterlife are natural and not paranormal in any way.

 

I found myself wondering why I spend time reading skeptical websites and having so much interest in what sorts of opinions exist about my work and passion. The truth is that I would never want to con or hurt anybody by doing what I do, and I believe that as a human being I have to do everything in my personal power to keep from being untrue or misleading others.

 

I think that as part of your prelim. tests you should find a way to tell if a claimant truly believes in what they do. Lie detector tests are unreliable but somewhat legit. I wonder if you are gawking at my letter so far, or if you can tell how sincere I am and that I do believe in the reality of psychic ability.

 

I do not claim to have any powers or paranormal/supernatural abilities. I do experience a very unusual and rare event when I sit with someone who has come to me seeking counsel.

All I know of each client of mine is their first name. And within moments I will start talking about exactly why they have come. They do not speak nor do they even have to confirm. In some cases they are even on the telephone.

I do not ask questions. And when I hear or see names in my mind I usually always get them around the subject at hand.

IE:  I may say "Your father is a very nice man",  then the next statement I make is "I see the name John there".   Later my client explains their father's name is John.

 

I personally feel that you would call anything cold reading.  You would go to great lengths to explain away the 100% accurate hits simply because in your model of the world, there can be no such a thing as psychic ability.  So therefore your challenge is simply a challenge of how many different ways you could reject the evidence of Psychic ability and the Afterlife.

 

Could you prove to me that you or someone you work with does not have a pre-set model of the world that is so rigid in it's foundation that psychic ability, when demonstrated, would actually be accepted?

 

 Because I have seen no proof on your part and in your cynical tone that you even care if such a thing would exist.

What must a person do to demonstrate their ability?  Give me an example of what a positive hit would be in a practical setting.

Tell me what Subject A:  The psychic would have to say to subject B the sitter, in what scenario that would qualify as a hit to you.

 

Thank you

 

Brough.

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Spencer Marks

To: Brough Perkins

September 20, 2007 1:23 AM

 

Hello Brough,

 

Thank you for contacting the IIG.

 

 First, let me assure you that we are on the same page about many things. If the ultimate goal is to seek the truth, no matter what that truth is, then you and all of us at the IIG desire the same thing. As you know, we offer a $50,000 prize to anyone who can prove any paranormal or "fringe science" claims. We have made this offer for some time, and James Randi has offered a $1,000,000 prize for even longer to try to find proof of paranormal activities. To date, no one has been able to show, under controlled conditions, anything that would show any indication of such paranormal activities.

 

I find it interesting to note that not ONE psychic individual or group offers the same type of prize for anyone to prove that they are a fraud, but that can be a topic of discussion for another time.

 

Brough, you are right, you do sound very sincere. We have no way of knowing, outside of testing you in a controlled setting, to see if you have legitimate powers, and we would be happy to do so. As you can well imagine, we get the whole spectrum of applicants ... from those that are mentally ill or delusional, to those that are obviously trying to perpetrate a fraud, as well as others like yourself who are very genuine in their beliefs. The problem is that those who are genuine in their beliefs, who have had great success around friends and family, all seem to lose their powers when the conditions are controlled. By the way, ANY time that we set up a test, it is with the entire cooperation of the person being tested ... there are no tricks or surprises ... we go to great lengths to set up a protocol that is acceptable to both us and the person being tested. Always.

 

Just a couple more thoughts. As you mentioned, if this power or gift that you have is "natural," that is, it exists in nature, and is not "above nature" (or supernatural), then it SHOULD be able to be found by man. It should be testable, it should be identifiable, and it should be measurable. All humans no matter where they are located have the ability to see, hear, smell, touch, and taste (ignoring individuals who are blind, deaf, etc), and any other sense that one human has, SHOULD be available to all other humans, if this sense IS within nature. If all humans are within the possibility of this type of power, then I can't imagine how Las Vegas would exist, or the Stock Market, or the Lottery, etc. I can't imagine why it is that not ONE human being stepped forward to predict the tragedy of September 11th, 2001 ... wasn't THAT event big enough to have been foretold? But no one did ...

 

Brough, if the way you do your readings are as you describe, where you tell them the name of their father and this ISN'T the same type of "fishing" questions that are so obvious in a "cold reading," then we would be VERY interested in meeting with you. This is actually to our benefit too, as we would be the FIRST group to scientifically discover and document true "paranormal" (or whatever you would want to call it) powers. It is NOT in our interest to see you fail, as that does not expand the frontiers of science and knowledge. The $50,000 prize paid to you would be FAR surpassed in income from our own publishing rights, speaking tours, and of course, the $1,000,000 honorarium from the Nobel Prize!

 

As a final thought, let me give you an example of the kind of reading that would NOT be acceptable. Since you know what a "Cold Reading" is, I won't belabor the point, but I myself have had great success when I demonstrate to people what a Cold Reading is. For example, one woman recently (who I told up front that I was simply demonstrating a Cold Reading) was asked what Peter meant to her? She said it was her current boyfriend. I asked her what Paul meant to her. She said it was her ex-boyfriend. I then asked who Nigel was (I was trying to be clever, as this woman was British). She said she knew no one named Nigel. I asked her who Mary was, and she stated this was her Mum. I had three out of four hits, and all I had done was used the names of the old 1960's Folk Music group, "Peter, Paul and Mary!" When she later told one of her coworkers of my "talent," she had forgotten that I had one miss ... Nigel.  I had to remind her of that, thus proving once again people tend to remember the "hits," and forget the "misses."

 

Brough, I am NOT suggesting that this is what you do in your readings, as I have not seen them, but I would simply ask that you look deeply into how you are getting these hits. Are you REALLY saying, "Your father's name is John" as a statement, or are you asking, "I see a John in your life" and letting the subject fill in the blanks? As I said, we would be interested in meeting you, and testing you under controlled conditions. We will create a protocol that is comfortable to both you and us, but we will need you to STATE the name of the parents (or whatever information is agreed upon) of our subjects, and not ask open-ended, vague questions which are indistinguishable from the questions asked by phony psychics in a typical cold reading.

 

We welcome your response.

 

Sincerely,

 

Spencer Marks

Investigator

Independent Investigations Group

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Brough Perkins

To: Spencer Marks

September 20, 2007 5:04 AM

 

Dear Spencer thank you for your sincerity and honesty.
I am struck with a sense of relief to find I'm dealing with someone who has ethics and
is not cynical. I am very young, and have been using my professed psychic ability since the
age of 15 professionally. I believe whole heartedly in what I do, and no it hasn't always been easy.
My gravitation toward science is part in due to my own desire to keep myself in check and away
from fooling people and myself. I have attached a two page article written on me by a journalist who's original
intent was to expose me as a fraud in the community a few years ago. We have since become great
friends and are writing a book for teens this year.
In the article the journalist briefly mentions something of his own experience having a reading with me.
I would wonder what your thoughts are in terms of what constitutes a hit with out cold reading.

Also: Let me suggest that to some extent if psychic ability is real, there will ALWAYS be an element of cold reading
to any reader. Think about this for just a second: If all I profess is that I get visions in my mind or hear short phrases and sentences
in my mind that come from "out of no where" then of course there's some degree of interpretation involved in making sense of the "super information"
being received. What makes it psychic/ or spiritual in origin? Well time and time again the information pertains directly to the subject sitting in front of me, or sometimes in another country over the telephone.
Being psychic doesn't mean you know everything. It means you see visions and hear short phrases and words which, as the medium for such information, you must put into a phrase yourself, in a sensible manner that resonates with the client. I can see where this process may become frustrating for a scientist who wants to get rid of the mediums own filters which only serve to "distract" from the purity of the information being received.
I also feel Dr. Gary Schwartz, whom you will no doubt attack, has taken great efforts to reduce if not totally be rid of the mediums personal interpretation and has striven to get the purest messages from mediums with out cold reading. He will sit a medium in one room, and a client in another. The medium doesn't even know the client's gender or age or name and yet the client has arrived having specifically wanted to hear from a deceased loved one, if such a thing is possible.
The client is given a score sheet to mark down what information is accurate. Not even the scientist testing the procedure always knows what the client is expecting, thus creating a tripple blind test. The subject or client nearly 100% of the time will receive total confirmation that their loved one is there via identities and names.

Furthermore I appreciate your candor and that you are not suggesting what I do is intentional cold reading.
You should know I am open to the possibility that what I do can sometimes be cold reading. I am human and am subject to error.
I think it's VERY important for scientists to get involved in my work so we can rule out fraud and make what I do more sensible and ethical.
Perhaps one day the public will not be so gullible to fall for the abuse of charlatans and thieves who come under false religious and spiritual
facades.

But I must say Spencer, I feel that your example of cold reading was very far off from what I do. However, on the surface to the in experienced eye
say: the eye of the general public, there would not appear to be much difference.
If I get names I always tell my client where they are. It is rare that I will get a name and not know who it belongs to.
Sometimes I have to pose a question. But the question isn't cold. For example: If I'm talking about someone's sister, then I see an image of a young girl, I may say "And your sister has just one daughter?". And as we keep talking I may get a name. K or C like Caren or Kristen. I say "So we've been talking about your sister and her child. I see a C or K name like Caren or Kristen". Then the client will say "Yes that's her daughter".

To you this may seem like cold reading, but to a statistician and to the client, what are the odds of me blurting out the name of her sisters daughter, as I am talking about that part of the family, after I stated that her sister has just one daughter. (this was a true example from a recent reading by the way).

Finally I will also state for the record that I can not choose what I see. Because the information I get depends on sources outside of myself, if you say "What's my fathers name" I wont just have an answer. But if you send ten clients all of whom have strong emotions around their fathers, whether there was abuse, loss of life or just a deep heart felt bond, I will against probable odds receive information pertaining personally to their father. That's because undoubtedly the client would have some need for resolve around that subject.

As long as the clients are truly there for a real purpose, and not just for "fun" then I will function my best.

PS: In my original letter I stated clearly that I do not have any powers. Psychic ability is a facet of the mind and is there for anybody. In your reply, which was quite lovely to read for the most part, you stated that I said I believed I had a power or "gift". Would you have a problem with a world class athlete or a genius in mathematics stating that they were born "gifted". The term gift is just an affectionate term I believe that people will use to describe something to which they themselves had no choice about having. It should be seen and regarded as a sign of sincerity on your part when someone professes to be gifted because what they are actually telling you is that they didn't wake up one day and decide to be a psychic. That helps a lot in determining whether someone is who they say they are or a fraud. What I do is not a magic trick, nor an illusion any more than any other facet of physical perception. Lets keep in mind that perception itself is largely illusory though and so I refer again to my above points about how there will always be an element for human error which might be construed as cold reading.

Yours,
Brough

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Brough Perkins

To: Spencer Marks

September 20, 2007 5:13 AM

 

One more thought for the morning:

If your intentions are genuinely for the advance of science then you may consider changing your organizations emphasis of "a challenge and prize"  to a more professional theme.

 

As it stands, waving money in the face of psychic mediums and  describing laboratory testing by using circus terminology like "challenge"and  "million dollar prize", is just ridiculous.

 

In fact just re-reading what I've written now, I am wondering again why I've even bothered to write your organization.

 

Your doubting friend

B.

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Brough Perkins

To: Spencer Marks

September 20, 2007 6:15 AM

 

By the way,

How do you know personally that no individual psychically sensed the September 11th tragedy?   I find that to be an extremely weak argument.

Unless of course you're speaking about sensational media psychics like Sylvia Browne.

 

I can tell you that two Psychic's I know of did predict september 11th and had stated their predictions prior to the event.

 

1:  Christopher Robinson, a British man who was at Arizona University at the time was being tested in a laboratory for his claimed psychic powers. Each night Mr. Robinson recorded his dreams on a note pad. The day after the dream a scientist would be on the road somewhere in Arizona, going to some sort of specific location.  Each night Chris would dream of those places that the "target" was going and described them with alarming accuracy.

What's more is that the scientist on the road picked up a crystal at a gift shop and hung it in his mirror just for his own amusement, Chris Robinson saw this in his dream.

Great lengths were taken to rule out human error.

 

Two weeks prior to september 11th, Chris Robinson woke up from a dream but his notes weren't about the target location for that day. He saw two planes crashing into towers, and specified to Dr. Schwartz he believed it to be in New york and that it would happen in September. They even sent a letter to the British Govt. but it got there too late.

 

2:  I myself was only a teenager at the time when I suddenly kept having dreams of death, fire and kept seeing my friends faces in coffins. I fell into a depression and during a walk one evening through the park with a friend who was consoling me, I said "Leslie something horrifying is going to happen in the world. It's either here in Toronto or in the states, but it's going to be a huge tragedy and I keep thinking it's next month"

This was in August just a month before September 11th.

Ironically I had got my first job that year working for a store that sold spiritual items. My first day of work was on september 11th, and as I got dressed I watched the towers fall on the news.  As I witnessed this on CNN, I said out loud to myself in the room "This was what I was seeing".

The store I worked at was called "where angels gather". That day several people came into our store to seek solace. Some had family in new york city.

 

You have to take my word for my experience, as it is purely anecdotal to you.

But please try to realize that psychic perceptions aren't the same as "knowledge". You can sense a huge tragedy but that doesn't mean you'll know what it is specifically.

And nowadays with such cynical organizations that put down psychics and state lies such as "no police crime has ever been solved using psychics", which is not true if you talk to the colleagues of Alison Dubois who worked for a district attorney for many years and has solved crimes using psychic ability, you will find that it would be difficult for someone like me to be taken seriously by government if we wanted to prevent a tragedy.

 

 A tragedy such as the one to come in the next ten-fifteen years when one of the major cities in your country is destroyed by a nuclear bomb in a suit case in the basement of a building.  It will be the worst we've ever seen, and London UK is at risk.

Unfortunately your country will retaliate and nuke Iran and kill millions in return.

But sometimes these sorts of things can't be prevented, and people like me will be persecuted for even seeing such things.  And if proven accurate, would be accused of planning or being part of it. Such as the case of a psychic woman from your country who was thrown in Jail after actually finding a missing body that she had been working on with police herself.

 

You can't tell me that these cases which are documented and legit, are all "made up", or "lucky guesses".  You really have to prove to me that you're going to be serious about this and that when I provide evidential information you wont ignore it.

So far I've received little proof of that on your behalf.  Tell me what would constitute a proper "hit" in your books and under what circumstances.

 

You describe cold reading.  So now describe a genuine reading. What do you think psychic ability is, so that I can work with you to determine if this is a worthy cause to pursue.

 

Thank you

B

 

_________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Brough Perkins

To: Spencer Marks

September 20, 2007 6:29 AM

 

PS PS PS PS: =P

 

"

I find it interesting to note that not ONE psychic individual or group

offers the same type of prize for anyone to prove that they are a

fraud, but that can be a topic of discussion for another time."-

 

 

http://www.victorzammit.com

Specifically has a five hundred thousand dollar challenge to anyone who can replicate

his group's physical mediumship phenomena successfully using fraud.

 

They tie up, gag, and take every precaution to rule out fraud from the medium and sitters

and yet still voices materialize out of thin air and give accurate information to sitters about their dead loved ones as well as interact and answer questions. Other physical phenomena occur as well.

 

So you really just suffer from a simple lack of knowledge about this field. It seems I have more facts than you do about actual tests, studies, challenges and psychic's.   It surprises me that you even wonder why so many mentally challenged people apply for your "prize" because you advertise yourselves in such a non-scientific manner.

 

Genuine psychics wont take you seriously until your organization steps up to the plate and actually puts it's preconceived notions aside in the name of science such as the other scientists have.