Why do Mediums and Psychics use pseudonyms?

KatyKing wrote:Well she was very versatile. The first Mrs K and I went to her Spiritualist circle. All sorts else went on in that basement flat on other nights [I'm told].
Proper PM with Maxine and no need of a cabinet either.

Physical mediumship like what?

In other threads on this forum there are accounts of Spiritualists having their wells poisoned, being attacked by angry mobs, and of being literally smoked out of their homes. Likewise we can still find accounts of materialization mediums who were "accidentally" killed while manifesting ectoplasm despite having body guards and being inside a cabinet.
So some mediums do not want to be ridiculed, attacked, advised, questioned, or hounded for free readings on an hourly basis by the same person. I'm sure there are other reasons as well, but the adage "better safe than sorry" often applies.

Mark74 wrote:I have noticed during my years quite a number of mediums and psychics use pseudonyms when working, I have often thought about this, why change your name. Any of yous here notice this few mediums I know that work the church circuit use pseudonyms. What are your thoughts on this.

Its good old fashioned show business, simple as that.
Derek Acorah for example sounds much better than boring old Derek Johnson.

With regards to non-famous mediums using other names, it is usually to help hide their business name if trading as a sole trader etc from people investigating them.
Also if you are committing fraud and pretending to be a psychic, then you are harder to track down if using a false name, as ALL real names can be found on the elctoral role along with your home address!! Last thing you want is a disgruntled victim turning up at your home address and demanding their money back!

petal34 wrote:
You are probably correct,Mark.
Wonder why Colin picked the name Lincoln?
Would Magnus be the control Colin uses in his performances?

Lincoln is a near anagram of Colin, simple as that, after he got exposed as a fraud as Lincoln, by the Psychic News no less, after the cover up and spreading of mis-information, he started using the name Colin Fry which I believe is his real name.

Magnus is his alleged spirit guide, someone who Colin has NEVER proven ever really existed.

There ya go!

Hmm not all psychics and mediums use pseudonyms and even some of them are questionable but in one area I would argue with Jon not all are frauds and that should never be the sceptical mantra that it is all fraud and we have to prove its real, open mindedness to all possibilities is very important

In terms of Spiritualist mediums, I know of very few who have ever used a pseudonym. A few who have, did so for one of two reasons. First, because they were employed in a profession or field where for it to be known they also gave service as a Spiritualist medium would result in potential loss of their job due to prejudice against their religious beliefs. Second, some believed (rightly or wrongly) that they had been given a 'spirit name' to work under by the spirit world, and so they are honouring that belief by using it.

Of course there are many pseudo-psychics and pseudo-mediums out there who are unscrupulous and use false names in order to avoid the potential consequences of their deceptive practices. True Spiritualists neither condone or support such practices.

Lis ADMIN

Admin wrote:Hmm not all psychics and mediums use pseudonyms and even some of them are questionable but in one area I would argue with Jon not all are frauds and that should never be the sceptical mantra that it is all fraud and we have to prove its real, open mindedness to all possibilities is very important

Skepticism at its base is being open minded. The problem is that 100% of mediums ever tested in credible scientific studies fail 100% of the time when the chance to cheat is removed. No exceptions, no anomolies, 100% failure rate.

Note I am reffering to mediums here.

With regards to psychics, there is a huge problem with testing done in the 70's 80's 90's etc, due to the stupidity of scientists.
Bit like using a car mechanic to test the validity of a painter.
This is also one of the reasons psychics and mediums refuse to be tested by magicians or those with such a background, the very people most likely to spot how the trick is done etc.

History tells us there are two types of mediums.
Eyes open mediums, and eyes closed mediums.
For those unaware of these terms, eyes open means the medium KNOWS they are a fraud and eyes closed means the medium is deluded and genuinely believes they have powers.

All that matters if whether they can do it or not, and again history shows us that they cannot.

The claims of mediums do not add up, they break the laws of physics, chemistry and biology.
And if anyone starts talking about Quantum Physics etc, please post proof of your Phd in Physics and Particle physics first, because anyone who does not have such qualifications, does not understand Quantum Physics etc.

I can state with certainty, with historical and scientific fact firmly on my side that mediumship in all its forms is impossible today and on every day in history up till today.

It is also impossible for man to fly to the moon by flapping his arms, or for a woman to give birth to a fully grown White Shark.
These things are impossibilities.

I use these ridiculous examples before someone does the classic of asking me to prove a negative.

Being open minded means changing your mind when EVIDENCE, when SCIENTIFIC proof, proves something new, being closed minded means believing with these things, being convinced of something through faith.

Not one person on this forum has ever truly received proof that a medium is communicating with the dead, not one person! Like it or not that is the truth.
And again please note the word proof! Proof is not the same as being convinced, Proof is NOT a medium telling you something they couldn't possibly know, proof is not an anecdote, or hearing voices in your head. These things are not proof.

And to any psychics/mediums reading this, validation from one of your clients is also NOT PROOF!

If the afterlife was real, dont you think the great dead scientists would have come through and offered a scientific theory that would explain their existence?
No instead we get "your mom says there is some important documents in an old biscuit tin and other such inane nonsense