James Van Fraud


This man is a total fraud. He has been caught in his lies on tv countless times. Though I honestly believe some people have the "gift," most of the time, they do not. I spoke with a friend of mine who got on his show and was told ahead of time that it was just "an act." She was forced to pretend that it was all real.

Check out any of Michael Shermer's articles on the subject. Just google in "James Van Fraud" and you'll see what I mean. You may also learn how these other so called "psychics" scam people.

reply



I read some of it.
It was shocking
It makes the movie a lot less beautiful.
Which is a shame actually...

reply

I understand. I was so disgusted with this movie after I researched him. But over time I've realized that this is a wonderful movie and should not be brought down by this real life loser.

reply

I guess it's the silver lining principal. You can get a nice piece of entertainment sprouting from even the ugliest of places sometimes.

Personally I despise Van Praagh, and all of his lying, manipulative ilk who prey upon people's loss for their own financial gain, but that doesn't make the film itself any less good when taken purely upon it's own merrits. Just know it's not true, that it's only a movie (a pretty good one all in all), and don't buy into the Van Praagh hype and propoganda machine.

reply

[deleted]

I sincerely believe that psychic ability is within everyone to a varying degree, but I do feel that while he may exhibit some ability, the evidence clearly shows that Van Praagh is primarily a manipulative "cold reader". These type of people give legitimate psychics a bad name.

The film obviously was not based upon fact and like Danson's portrayal was way over the top. It is a made for TV movie however, so I shouldn't expect anything different.

reply

"These type of people give legitimate psychics a bad name."
What legitimate psychics? What the hell are you talking about?

reply

Always nice to see a ref to my pal Michael Shermer. The skeptic.com site is great, as is the mag (and associated site) Skeptical Inquirer. This phony -- and his pals like John Edward and the Queen of Phonies herself, Sylvia Browne -- are reprehensible, making money off people's credulousness as they grieve. Absolutely disgusting. Some knucklehead cops have been fooled by these swamis, but there is not a single police department or other law enforcement agency that has officially declared ANYTHING solved by a psychic. It's all crap. Dangerous, insulting, ludicrous, harmful crap.

reply

Since writing the comment below I have seen JVP do readings in person and I have something to share with the non-believers:
2 people in the audience for whom he read, said, while he was reading, they didn't know what he was talking about. In one case, a woman said she didn't know why her father was talking about going fishing, they never went fishing, but JVP didn't drop it, he was sure about it. In the other, a woman kept saying she didn't connect with what JVP was saying about her father, who kept telling her "I got all dressed up for you" and JVP said he was wearing a bowtie, but she said her father never wore one. As we were leaving the auditorium I was behind the woman who had said she didn't know what the fishing was about, and she was telling her friend "OMG I totally remember now - he used to go big-game fishing in Florida every year with my brother! It was true!" and in the other case, I was actually speaking with the woman who claimed her father didn't wear a bowtie, and she said she asked her best friend about it, who said -- are you kidding? He wore one every night when he went to work, he was a bartender! Don't you remember? So in both those cases, the women only realized the significance after the reading but during it, couldn't, but JVP didn't let it affect his reading, even when they claimed he was wrong, he was sure, and kept going. And voila, he was indeed right.

********

I read that site and was not sufficiently impressed that he is a fraud, for several reasons.

First, none of the things he said he saw in the supposedly "leading questions" would apply to just anyone. Would you have answered yes to any of those questions? I know I would have been a "no"; to every one of them. (for example, I have no one in my life with a lengthy illness who has received IVs) Yet, more than 80% of the callers were a yes.

Second, in my view, he should have stopped when the person who said they didn't know about the headaches said no. Because he was obviously not getting good information at that time, or the caller was just being forgetful. None of us, including the person who wrote the review, knows if the caller or someone in the house has headaches. Only the caller does, and they might have forgotten in the moment, which is common. (for example, who hasn't forgotten what they went to buy when they didn't bring a list to the store? And, looking at their list, who hasn't forgotten something on it that they desperately needed, while it was in plain sight?)

Third, none of the answers to the leading questions supplied sufficient information to result in the subsequent reading. It's my analysis that the reviewer had a bee in his bonnet and so didn't even pay attention to the rest of what JVP said in each reading.

Fourth, one mistake on one show does not a fraud make (if you consider the headaches as a mistake).

Finally, the person in this thread who says they were told "it's just a show" probably misunderstood the producers who were telling the audience that he chooses whom he will sit for before the show starts, and they thought they meant it was all pre-rehearsed.

If you hear the story of why Ted Danson was willing to do the movie, you might even be amazed ...


"I was made to understand there were grilled cheese sandwiches here"

reply