Brad Henderson wrote:you suspected it and you were wrong.
this is what happens when you rely on your limited knowledge and lack of experience.
and he doesn't attempt to predict what page tney will look at. He looks at the same page they look at. You don't even know how the trick is done and you are trying to draw conclusions based on the wrong method!
he said i couldn't know what page you are thinking of - that is untrue. He COULD know by just looking at it at the time they look at it - which is exactly the method.
it's a lie
just as miscounting the page is. Or what of the moment when he literally hands playing cards to one of the participants? you condemn the hoy test because the magician tells them what page and word to look at, but canasta literally hands him two cards and tells them what they are at the end
you don't pick your examples very well.
and again, you are trying to spin matters. 1) you claim a real psychic would have a hard time knowing what line is what. But why? if the psychic has the ability to see a thought of page in their mind and count down to the line requested and over to the word, why would they be wrong? if i can count then why wouldn't the psychic be able to? counting is not the psychics skill. And the fact that a psychic has this odd ability to know what can't be known, why would they get it wrong? you say it's logical they would, but why? show me the accepted, proven, scientific text on what real psychics do and where it says that all psychics make mistakes like this. you may as well have said we all known dragons are green because logic says they must be.
and a psychic ISNT someone with a good memory. the psychic sees what cannot be seen. once again you are confusing method and effect. You are thinking like a magician.
a psychic can get their information from many sources, perhaps they have an angel that whispers in their ear. Maybe they pick up vibrations. neither of which require counting.
but that doesn't change the fact (as corroborated by britland) that canasta miscounted to the line. Why he would have gotten it wrong is irrelevant. The issue is that he did what you condemn users of hoy of - lying, specifically miscalling. he miscalls the line number.
heck, by you logic if i'm going to use the hoy ruse i'm not lying because maybe when i looked at the page number i accidentally saw the wrong one and just happened to call out the force page. I mean, if a psychic seeing a page in their mind could reasonably count to the wrong line (and that isn't lying to you) why couldn't i as a mind reader make the same sort of mistake and see the wrong numbers at the bottom of the page? my eyesight isn't so good, you know.
so again, your position is groundless.
oh, and then there is the interview in The People that canasta gave in 1960 where he openly lies about what he does methodologically. this is in part what has led to you flawed 'understanding' of his photographic memory.
once again keyes, you really should try and to know SOMETHING about the subjects you post on. maybe spend less time making videos in your car and get out there and actually perform some magic for real people.
it certainly can't hurt - you.
Brad, we all know you are trying to extricate yourself from your own bad logic, and turn the tables on me, but it's not going to work.
You try to obscure my point, which is that Canasta didn't need to lie in the Parkinson video by scrounging around for some other trick that he might have lied in the performance of.
I have never been so bold as to claim that Randi or Canasta or anyone "never lied in their entire careers". This is YOUR straw man tactic.
You desperately nitpick everything I say in hope of finding a single fault. Which you haven't managed yet.
You are trying to find as many flaws in my argument as I have found in yours. And you just keep falling further behind.
I don't think like you, Brad. I don't huff and puff and bluff my way through a debate. I stand on solid principles rather than emotional wellsprings.
For the last time: No one, Chan or you or me, can predict with certainty what a volunteer will choose IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES that we were discussing. Therefore, it was not a lie to say, "I couldn't know what page you picked. I really couldn't!".
Chan and Parkinson did not both look at the chosen page at the same time. And even if he had, he still couldn't be sure of the man's choice.
I do not believe this was a deliberate miscall. Mr. Britland may or may not have concluded that Canasta lied on occasion, but you are going far afield in search of vindication.