Derren Brown

[Yothu]

A thing that troubles me in the docu "Messiah" is the fact, that those "teachers", "mediums" and "abductees" are obviously faking their "experiences" and "abilities" themselves. Watch their body language and you'll see. So, there comes Derren then and fakes his very own "shamanic", "abductee experience" and whatever kind of abilities himself.
No wonder those people do endorse him as the real thing because if they would doubt him they would ran into the risk of being exposed as fraud themselves in front of a running camera. So, this is kind of a doublebind.

They probably know that it is BS he's playing, but he's doing it so well that they see no incentive doubting him as "whatever he is in their eyes". Watch this woman that runs this esoteric publishing in Las Vegas. I'm pretty sure she is aware of the fake, but in terms of money she might decide that it can be a feasable concept to generate income. Hence she just plays his game together with him.

So, I wonder if the these five subjects (the psychic, the christian priest, the publisher, the ufo-author, and the medium) really believe what they are doing, or simply doing their job to make a living. Isn't it far more essential to discover why all these believers do so readily believe in the things that are presented to them?

[anonymousbeing]

FAKE? Fake of what? Do you think so? How can he obtain personal information unknown by others?

[Yothu]

FAKE? Fake of what? Do you think so? How can he obtain personal information unknown by others?

Watch this woman that runs this esoteric publishing in Las Vegas. I'm pretty sure she is aware of the fake

I say that this woman in Las Vegas in Derren's DVD "Messiah" is aware of the "dream machine" fake, just that it doesn't matter to her if it's fake or not.

I do not think she really remembered any details of her dreams precisely (she did not use any notes to verify or else - of course that means not much, but...) and of course not any of the ones Derren suggested her IMO.
So Derren could have told her pretty much anything that is in a certain range, which is acceptable to her and does not oppose her obviously, which he did IMO.

How can he possibly retrieve personal information unknown by others? If you look carefully at those scenes with him (I'm not sure if it is really him, but I very much suppose so) as a clown telling people "memories" of their past, it is not really that he tells them something specific. Of course his subjects think of something specific that is triggered by his words. For example: In one scene where he is disguised as a clown he approaches a young female (Totnes, Devon) and suggests her how her room looks like.

He tells her that in her room she got pale wooden floor, she got black & white photographs on her walls, she got 2 mirrors and she likes sleeping away from the light etc etc

Maybe he's a good guesser, maybe his statements are general so that they could well fit anybody, maybe he has some natural ability -
what I am pretty sure about is that he certainly well prepaired and knowledgeable in the field of psychology (and magic, suggestion, misdirection and showmanship as he himself states it).

[Robanan]

Is there any evidence that that the video is not showing just the few lucky conincidences? who knows out of how many tries he got "the perfect guessing" recorded?

[Yothu]

Is there any evidence that that the video is not showing just the few lucky conincidences? who knows out of how many tries he got "the perfect guessing" recorded?

I assume you'll have to watch the vids yourself to prove it. Of course, there is the possibility of editing, maybe there will be no way knowing for sure, nevertheless some of these tricks are repeatable. I did some of his tricks in simplified ways myself. It is really nothing extraordinary; he lets it appear spectacular very successfully in his shows though.

He himself states on his website that he himself does not possess any ability of mindreading. He is not a mindreader. Even though he lets it look like if he'd be one.

Besides he shows singular cases that do not respond to him as well. Eg. a guy who resists to be hypnotized in the underground.

[Yothu]

I've watched another series of "Trick of the Mind" these days. In his experiments Derren often makes people transmit and communicate particular things (can be images, numbers, in one case it is even a piece of music) through "some sort of mental conducting" as he calls it, which I as well could call "telepathy".

What makes me wonder is, if he deliberately does not call it "telepathy" or if what is commonly called "telepathy" is something different from genuine telepathy. Mere suggestion, manipulition of the subjects mind.

In order to "learn mindreading" Derren Bown advises his "trainees" to put his/her hands on the subjects temples, taking over control and ordering the subject to repeat the object in question (can be a pets name, a computer password, home adress etc) mentally over and over again. As if the subject wanted it to project it on the "reader".

Now, I've done this too quite once in a while. It is willing somebody to know this or that, willing somebody to do this or that. Depending on whether one comprehends the above as normal mode of functioning of our mind and brain this can be called telepathy. I am sure everybody does it once in a while, whether he/she is aware of it or not.

[Alisima]

FAKE? Fake of what? Do you think so? How can he obtain personal information unknown by others?

You'll be surprised of all the things that you express unconsciously. If one learns how to 'read', that is, see those unconscious expressions, one can come to know some very personal things.

For instance, a friend of mine can look at woman and tell whether they are beaten by their spouse. A very personal thing, don't you think?? This is no telepathy, it is just reading someones bodily expressions. Ofcourse one must know where to look, but if you do it is as easy as lipreading.

Derren Brown is, from what I have read here on the forum, using a similar technique. Just reading someones expressions: how he stands, whether he looks at your mouth or your eyes or right above your eyes, whether he exhales his smoke down to the grond or up in the air, whether he stands firmly on two legs instead of bringing the weight on one foot, whether he has any tension in his eyebrowns, how his eyes look (glassy or....), how his spline is positioned, how he breathes, whether he sits with his legs crossed, whether his shoulder is forward or backward, how often he looks away from you, how conscious he is of the environment, blablabla, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on. Ofcourse, I don't know what it means when a person does some particular thing, but I know that it must mean something. And it does; Derren is the evidence of that.

Ofcourse, all things Derren does are possible with telepathy too. But people somehow think that telepathy is hard or something, or not possible. Well, I bet Derren took at least 5 years, but perhapse 10, to get to the level where he is now. If you would take those 10 years and learn telepathy instead, I bet you can do much more than Derren does. Even amaze him.

[Yothu]

Well, I bet Derren took at least 5 years, but perhapse 10, to get to the level where he is now.

Somewhere on the internet I read that Derren Brown stated it took him 10 years of training to get to the level he now is.

Found the source:

But while even Derren would admit that what he does is 'not down to natural talent' and that, in theory, anyone could do it, he is keen to point out that it took years to develop his skills. 'It's all about working at it,' he says. 'It took me 10 years to learn this stuff.' Uri Geller also believes that 'psychic powers' are only an extension of our normal powers, and that everyone has the capability to possess them. For him, it's all about concentration, which is rather like working out in the gym. 'If you lift weights for a day or two,' says Geller, 'nothing happens. But if you lift weights every day for one or two years, then you will see the change.'

http://www.channel4.com/entertainment/t ... usion.html

[shezmear]

Many people mistake these abilities as the development of spirituality, they call them selves spiritual because there are so called psychic, I have found that every one is psychic to a varying degree, it really just depends were they put there attention.

Of course once one is psychic, what is one to do with it?
Spend one’s time manipulating people?
Reading their minds?
Start telling people their future? (Which just services to screw with there nature judgment)
Start telling people the truth? (Which most know or have access to but don’t want to hear it, or don’t know what to do with it?)

What I have found is the more sensitive you become; the more you learn to shut off just to get by.

I used to work on my Auric site but I found I could actually sense better then anything else, that is when I meet someone, I did not really need to see there aura to get a feeling of who they were, I found trying to see color just confused me, children a very good at sensing people, they either like you or they don’t and this is determined very quickly.

[Yothu]

children a very good at sensing people, they either like you or they don’t and this is determined very quickly.

Nothing special about kids. That is with every adult too, isn't it?

[survivor]

children a very good at sensing people, they either like you or they don’t and this is determined very quickly.

Nothing special about kids. That is with every adult too, isn't it?

On the contra Yothu, children are special, a young uncorrupted mind=a very very healthy mind, kids do learn at lightning speed.

Also, I have lifted a post from Tom Chalko @ the freedom forum

"When I explained techniques of seeing auras to my son, who was 12 at the time, he said "well, when I was little I saw this all the time, but since no one was mentioning it - I thought that there was something wrong with my eyes..." [Tom]

[Alisima]

children a very good at sensing people, they either like you or they don’t and this is determined very quickly.

Nothing special about kids. That is with every adult too, isn't it?

Indeed adults do this too. But with adults it is biased and with childeren it is not. Childeren sense the reality, the person, and adults just make assumptions and deductions. The assumptions and deductions are filled with personal bias and thus untrue, spoiled and unpure. Childeren don't have those assumptions and deductions because they haven't been taught to the child, so if the child gets a feeling he doesn't spoil the feeling by interpreting it or make assumptions about it, he just feels the feeling. Or rather, is the feeling.

[Yothu]

We have to agree to disagree here.

Why should only children be able to tap into a mental state that allows to intuitively grasp reality? I think it is well possible to do the same with grown-ups. Why shouldn't it be?
Think of the "aura-reading" Michel experienced while in the vicinity of the seven masters of Thiaoouba. If I may draw an analogy: Rather than staying at the mental level of children or wishing back there again as adults, the masters took it to another level.

That's what I am saying: To me it is natural development when an adult mind uses the experience it learnt as a child and takes it even further with its adult capabilities.

Necessarily, we might not even disagree. It could be mere mutual misunderstanding in this case.

[shezmear]

I`m not saying it is just with children , I`m saying it is very noticeable with children as a example.

[Alisima]

We have to agree to disagree here.

Why should only children be able to tap into a mental state that allows to intuitively grasp reality? I think it is well possible to do the same with grown-ups. Why shouldn't it be?
Think of the "aura-reading" Michel experienced while in the vicinity of the seven masters of Thiaoouba. If I may draw an analogy: Rather than staying at the mental level of children or wishing back there again as adults, the masters took it to another level.

That's what I am saying: To me it is natural development when an adult mind uses the experience it learnt as a child and takes it even further with its adult capabilities.

Necessarily, we might not even disagree. It could be mere mutual misunderstanding in this case.

I didn't meant to say that adults are unable to do it. Ofcourse, adults can do it too. But, it is a bit harder since the mind is 'in the way'. A child has no mind, or at least just a little one, so it is easier for him. Perhapse I should have been more clear about it, but you are right, adults can do it too. Anyone can. But rarely does any adult actualy do it. The point is not to confuse intuition with minding. When is something from the intuition and when is it from mind??