The Skeptic's Guide to the Paranormal: Kelly, Lynne: 9781560257110: Amazon.com: Books (original) (raw)
- Sort by reviews type
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on February 20, 2010
This book is a good start but if you want a detailed analysis of various paranormal scams you have to look else where, I wish there was more substance to this book , it started with a bang but fizzled toward the end, and UFO/alien treatment was tad bit too long.
One person found this helpful
Reviewed in the United States on February 16, 2008
My two star rating reflects the poor production value of this book by Thunder's Mouth Press. Multiple typo's and broken sentences are to be found throughout this edition. On page 5, a line reads, "They didn't have sufficient for the normal, fast burn of a body doused in petrol." Chapter 8 refers to multiple photographs in the, 'plate section,' that does not exist in this book edition. The content of the book is another matter. Lynne Kelly attempts to be a fair reporter and her writing style is accessible. Unfortunately, her statement that it is up to the claimant of paranormal events to prove said claims, is watered down by her own sloppy research. In the chapter on human combustion, she refers to proof of the, "candle effect," based on a woman's body found in the woods of Medford, Oregon in 1991. There is no mention of this woman identity or how she initially caught fire. She references a forensic scientist (Dr. John DeHaan) who claims, "He knew that what he was looking at was an example of the candle effect." How did he know? If this is the field test case, I would like much more detailed information on his methods and theories. There is nothing new or dynamic in this edition. I would steer interested readers to the work of George P. Hansen and his book, "The Trickster and the Paranormal." This is not always a easy work but delivers a great read and inspires even greater questions on paranormal phenomenon.
6 people found this helpful
Reviewed in the United States on December 20, 2012
This is an amazing book for anyone who even thinks the word 'skeptic'. It covers a nice range of topics and is written in an easy to read manner. Buy it... For Science!
Reviewed in the United States on July 30, 2016
I've used this in my teaching composition class. It has interesting short source material for students to spring off into longer research projects on strange subjects.
Reviewed in the United States on February 23, 2008
Here we go again - these books are all the same. All psychics are 'actors' pretending to read your mind for their billfolds, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.
Yes, these people do exist. But name one profession which doesn't have poor practitioners? Where some people just want to get rich and will lie to get there?!
I happen to be a psychic, and whenever I read books like this one, I just laugh! No, I do not give out 'generalizations'. No, I don't use psychology to 'make up' my statements, or have 'spies' in the waiting room to report back to me what the client has been saying.
This is what I do: A client sits across from me. She'll ask me a question, and I get a vision of a very specific scene, and a strong 'sense' of what the vision is about. THen I tell her what I see & sense. Often, they are stunned.
I'm not here to boast that I have some very special gift. I'm writing to explain that it is people like this author who are ripping off people. Its she who makes very generalized statements in her book, and that is so easy to do. Almost anyone can write a book like this, and in this case, an almost nobody has.
A talented psychic serves a very important purpose in society. Some people are very frightened of the future, and a good psychic may help give them guidance re: what the future holds. Others need to know how to obtain a goal, or something they want, and want to know how to go about this.
I myself have seen psychics over the years, and they have helped me a lot.
All I want to tell readers is that they have an open mind, unlike this author.
7 people found this helpful
Reviewed in the United States on October 17, 2010
This is a breezy, easy-to-read book which exposes a lot of metaphysical claptrap, but since one cannot disprove a negative, she states "Without examining every case individually, it is impossible to state categorically that no medium has ever contacted the spirits" and "The failure of spiritualism to produce any tangible proof says nothing about the reality or otherwise of an afterlife." She mistakenly thinks that astrology somehow is based on "the gravitational effect of the planets;" whereas it has nothing to do with gravity. She also bases her criticism of astrology on the fact that most people's sun signs do not completely describe their personalities. Astrologers would agree, since there is also the rising sign, and all the signs all the planets are in in all 12 houses, plus the aspects they make with each other. So she does not completely disprove every topic covered.
One person found this helpful
Reviewed in the United States on December 9, 2007
As is typical of the "skeptic" (read as, the diehard naysayer who inappropriately credits himself with a balanced viewpoint), only the provable hoaxes are addressed--material from which those who advocate the legitimacy of the phenomenon are always careful to distance themselves--while anything out of range of trivial dismissal is covered by generalities. For example, it may indeed be that "a bear is easily mistaken for a sasquatch," but this glib statement is insufficient to dismiss thousands of pieces of quality evidence--footprints, aboriginal sculptures and traditions, eyewitness reports--that date back centuries. As an educated man who is careful to grant a balanced analysis to that to which he promises a balanced analysis, I find the likes of Dr. Joe Nickell and other self-styled "skeptics" to be a disgrace. Put them in a debate against an educated, experienced field researcher and watch these "skeptics" unravel like cheaply finished garments. Bah!
5 people found this helpful