|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Dec 23, 2006 13:32:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by monkeyboy on Dec 23, 2006 15:06:48 GMT
who IS that handsome transcriber?
|
|
|
|
Post by abcde on Dec 23, 2006 15:31:40 GMT
who IS that handsome transcriber? I don't know but there's a few errors in there.   |
|
|
|
Post by mesmo on Dec 23, 2006 16:42:07 GMT
My oh my oh my! - not wanting to massage your ego Jon (ooh err missuss), but with a bit of training from your good self, I reckon I could have done what Deggers just did! Why do people keep on defending him?  |
|
|
|
Post by monkeyboy on Dec 23, 2006 19:25:53 GMT
who IS that handsome transcriber? I don't know but there's a few errors in there. Yeah my bad. I really didn't feel like putting the address down for a defunct TV show... |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Dec 23, 2006 19:28:45 GMT
The poit with these clips is singular.
Many of his fans have always said that they were fans of Derek before MH, and that he was more acurate back then when he wasnt so famous and didnt have the same pressure.
Yet all i keep seeing is the same old bulls*it
|
|
|
|
Post by pcdunn2005 on Dec 24, 2006 5:20:04 GMT
He was "more accurate" in an live audience situation, doing cold-reading, because of the human element, in which people "accepted" (I suppose means "confirmed") what he said; when he was in a televised situation, dealing with the need to remember the correct historical details to pass on as coming from a "spirit", he failed, especially when Antix began pointing out his misses.
The whole draw to MH revolves around the notion that Derek (or any of the other mediums) truly don't know anything about the history of the locations the show visits in advance. But they phrase this as "no prior knowledge of this location", which to me seems to provide a loophole: the medium may research the location once there.
|
|
