SkepticblogSkepticblog logo banner

top navigation:

Enough is Enough, …Again

by Mark Edward, Apr 24 2010

My Dinner with Anita

I promised I wouldn’t write about what happened last Saturday night and I’m a man of my word. But after that night, I can officially say that my investigations into the claims made by Anita Ikonen are now at a sorry end. All the evidence I needed to see was put before me and as much as I hate to judge … it’s over. This is the last word you will hear from me about the Ikonen Saga unless she manages to levitate over The Statue of Liberty.

I won’t belabour any more about her intentions or suggest  further inappropriate insinuations about with who or where she or her ilk might spend their time, I will instead point out other people to fill in the blanks about what happened. It’s all on video. For starters, read about it here:

http://montereycountyskeptics.blogspot.com/2010/04/falsifying-anita-ikonen-vision-from.html  

& http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7a4iTEAusM

Now everyone can watch the videos and see for themselves. Be patient with the sound, but if it gets too hard to take, at least watch the last ten minutes of  the Part 4 video. It’s quite revealing. And then there’s much more to put the cap on this epic (she’s finally been banned) at the JREF forum under “Put a Fork in Her, She’s Done.”

All anyone could ever want to know about this claimant has now been torn apart, dissected into tiny bite-sized pieces and totally eviscerated. As far as this drama goes, I don’t think Humpty-Dumty can ever be put back together again. If JREF wants to keep on “investigating” Anita, they will have lost my vote as unbiased impartial investigators. You don’t need to be a player to know you are being played. I have spent the last twenty-five years in the company of psychics of all stripes and I can confidently say that what I have recently been a party to leaves a lot to be desired – even as entertainment – which this silliness clearly is not.  If anyone tried to pull off these sorts of naive shenanigans at a psychic fair, private party or store front fortune telling shop around here, they would be quickly asked to leave.

The Impromtu Finger Test

Anita is undoubtedly an attractive person who could go far – and many now wish she would. She has a certain charm and allure, but it’s my opinion such attributes would be better utilized in a modeling career rather than as a psychic – or a wannabe skeptic. As we waste more and more time paying attention to things totally unproven or outright falsified, (as the soon to be released IIG documents will reveal) real harm is being done to real people. Giving further attention to falsified claimants is like the wild goose chases police get led on by phony psychics when they might better spend their time and resources looking at real evidence. Imagining Anita’s game of x-ray charades going on in hospitals or medical facilities is just well, …unimaginable.

Why do we put up with this? If a person came up to you at a park bench and began to tell you how marvelous your intestines looked, wouldn’t you tell them to get the hell away? I would. Because I have made myself available to look at such claims, I’m given the dubious opportunity of dealing with many people who might otherwise be carted off to the bug house. It’s frustrating, but there’s no other choice. How else might we stumble upon something substantial? We probably won’t – ever, but that’s the deal. Either way, I don’t care what they look like. After they have failed; they failed, period.

We don’t see anyone offering further encouragement to Regen Traynor do we? He accepted his failure at IIG and quietly went away. Nobody made any further invitations for podcasts or dinner dates with him did they? Gee, I wonder why?

As skeptics who have found ourselves drawn into a line of bullcrap that rivals anything Geller ever tried to foist upon us. We should be ashamed of ourselves for pandering to such ridiculous cajolery. I hope that Anita will now go back to North Carolina feeling happily falsified, find a real job in real estate or modeling, get herself a purse chihuahua and disappear into the mists of Avalon from whence she came. She has a bright future as a pretty face and she should make the best of that.

Waiting for the Woo

And yes, I will admit that I was initially charmed into her game like many others. There is no doubt that when an attractive woman levels her smouldering Swedish green-eyed leer at you and you are unaware of the strings that might be attached to it, any red-blooded American male would be hard pressed to remain skeptical for too long. In such rare instances, knees begin to wobble and all the best intentions and convictions may get thrown to the wind. That’s how psychics work. Charisma can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands. Manipulative personalities who have successful careers as psychics or mediums are literally full of it. Anita is no exception and her animal magnetism can be disarming to say the least. I can understand how at other times in history women with these qualities might have been mistaken for “witches.” Fortunately, my days of rescuing or cuddling confused woo women has been over for quite some time. I’m immune.

As one skeptic wrote to me:  “This is a psychologically disturbed person.  She has serious emotional problems that require professional medical attention and we (individuals and the skeptical community at large) acting like we have anything to offer her is irresponsible.  Like there is some intellectual high road we’re walking.  “Maybe she’ll turn away from the “woo”!”   Bullshit.”

As I stated in my post “Sex in the Seance Room,” these dissolute distractions are nothing new in parapsychology and I want to make it clear that Anita is not alone in her ability to spin a web of intrigue and scandal. Eventually at some point, the web becomes an unsustainable trap for the spinner.  You can only bullshit for so long. In my case I might add; don’t bullshit a bullshitter. We are seeing Anita’s web unravel in blogs that are popping up all over the Internet denouncing both the simplistic conning that has been going on as well as her barrage of bizarre claims, contradictions and the inevitable excuses that follow each of her “tests.”

A Sign of the Times?

Anita Ikonen is an important case study we need to wake up to. As I predicted back in February of 2009, we are poised on the precipice of a whole new breed of ” psychics.” Expect to see many more like Anita: intelligent, attractive and oh-so-cunning. The days of rumpled little old ladies in lace dresses and gold cameos are over and now even the era of the new age tie-dyed hippie priestess has had its day. It’s a slick new modern highly trained “executive psychic” or university graduate who pretends to project a persona of befuddled skepticism that we have to be on our guard for now. If you don’t believe me, try Googling ESP Bootcamp and you can read for yourself what we are up against. The days of infiltrating their world is over. Now seekers of “higher knowledge” are working to charm even the most skeptical and get a foothold in ours. If they can sway us and get under our skin, they win. I’m not being paranoid here, just a realist. Witchery has a new name.

If it hasn’t happened yet, I’m calling for a complete blackout on Anita Ikonen. 

What’s next? Will she blame us for a nervous breakdown – or worse? Unless we pull the plug on this exploitive situation, skeptics risk a whole lot more than just a waste of time. We as a movement will lose credibility in the hearts and minds of serious investigators and the greater public we strive to connect with. So let’s move on. There’s lots more serious work to be done.

Enough is Enough

 “…who could predict then that from a little fibber you’d grow into a dangerous paranoid liar?”

-Eddie Lawrence, The Old Philosopher

 

P.S. Thanks to Arcturus Annie for the awesome photoshop pic and Susan Gerbic Forsyth for being there to catch the woo.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.6/5 (8 votes cast)
Enough is Enough, ...Again, 4.6 out of 5 based on 8 ratings

Recommended Reading

48 Responses to “Enough is Enough, …Again”

  1. MadScientist says:

    I didn’t realize there were still ‘investigations’ – what can possibly be investigated after the original tests? Especially where the JREF is involved I would have expected the usual procedure: write about your claims and sort out an agreed testing procedure. Perhaps another “seek urgent medical attention” letter is in order.

  2. Robo Sapien says:

    I got into a huge fallout with Jim Carr on JREF over this. He has spent many hours shunting every statement she has ever made, and done a fine job of it, but evidently took offense when I pointed out that there was no longer any point to doing so. When I suggested that people try and help her instead, I got further flamed and accused of skirt-chasing due in part to my deliberately lewd writings about her on my blog (we live 1000 miles apart FFS, and I already have a delightfully non-woo girlfriend). Then I was flamed even further when I pointed out that a blackout would not happen, realistically, as she is quite relentless and as long as she is around she will never stop pushing all this claim nonsense, and people will always jump right back on that train because she’s an easy target and they can pat themselves on the back for tearing apart everything she says. Others were offended by my statements because they too had tried to help her, but wound up writing her off all the same and joining the bashing party.

    Now she’s banned, and her threads on JREF have all died down. I’ve been talking to her on Skype, and actually having some decent conversations with her. She even thought my blog post was funny. Some have tried to warn me that she is a sociopath, liar, harlot, you name it, and that she will try to use me. Duh. I worked in a nightclub for 4 years, so I have a little practice at dealing with that. When we initiated dialogue, it was made abundantly clear that I’ll never fall for her manipulation and that I absolutely refuse to discuss her “investigation” or any of her bullshit claims. She has thus far respected that, and in return I treat her like a human being instead of Hitler. Does she deserve that? Probably not, but you don’t get anywhere with people otherwise.

    I chat with her now because despite the circus she’s created, I actually like her. She’s creative, well spoken and relentless as all hell in her pursuits. Some think that is hypocritical in light of my baleful review of her, but she seems to understand. Do I think she can change? Absolutely, anyone can change. Do I think she will? Very low probability, but I enjoy the challenge. She is immature and deluded, yes, but we all have to grow up eventually.

    She constantly harps about her “perception” but her problem lies in her perception of self. Like any normal human being, she wants to feel special and unique, only she doesn’t realize that she already is (most people are). Not entirely in a good way, but I can see her virtues, all she needs is to see them herself. She hasn’t figured out that she doesn’t need to fool everyone into thinking she has mystical powers to make them want to be around her. I’m told that skepticism is purely about logic and critical thinking, debunking false claims and correcting misinformation. That is true, but the movement is about sharing those skills with others. Otherwise, skeptics will always be an endangered species, but not quite extinct.

    The most obvious question that will follow this comment is, “Why not help Sylvia and Robbie too?” — That should be obvious, they aren’t cute twenty-something chicks. Oh, that and they are charlatans who have a debt to pay to society. The only hope for them is some time alone to think in a jail cell. Anita has yet to (seriously) hurt anyone, and the best way to prevent that is to help her change. It is a tall order, I know, but not unworthy of some effort by means of good conversation. Once she comes to understand the consequences of her actions, not just on others but on herself (like jeapordizing her career – if I were an administrator of a science institution, I wouldn’t hire her after watching the IIG video), maybe she truly will “turn the boat around.”

    Now my brain hurts, time to go back to thinking with my johnson.

    • MadScientist says:

      Hehehe; well, you sure know what to write to rile some people – I guess not everyone knows when you’re half joking (or they just don’t have a sense of humor). You do have to be a little careful in situations like this though so you don’t (a) feed the trolls and (b) write too many things which you will have to defend as ‘obvious cynicism’ later.

      I suspect people say too many things without evidence (even about Anna) but I agree with Mark on this one and I think it would be foolish for people to ignore his advice. Going back to Mark’s earlier post, anyone investigating Anna should not have any other relationship with her; if they want a non-professional relationship with her then they should resign their position first.

      • MadScientist says:

        Gah … ‘Anita’, not ‘Anna’. Stupid senile brain.

      • Robo Sapien says:

        Wise words, indeed. Antagonism just comes naturally to me, I guess. It is no different in real life, either. But I’ve inadvertantly come to learn that people will show their true colors if you get under their skin, and as such I’ve made some wonderful friends who started out hating me but were wise enough to stop letting me piss them off.

        I also agree wholeheartedly with Mark, that would absolutely be the best way to handle it, if people would actually do it. Therein lies the rub; there is too much self-gratification to be found in dissecting her bullshit. Ignore her, and she’ll just find a new group of people and a new identity. She’ll become a part of the “Wooness Relocation Program” lol.

      • Sgerbic says:

        I’m sure your right Robo. She will find another community, but with all the info out there on the Internet people will see how she is trying to start this “loop” all over again with them and maybe not engage her.

        I think it is nice of you to “engage” her. I’m sure she is soooo lonely and needs someone to rescue her. “If only there were someone to talk to, a real skeptic, someone who could be my hero…” Sound familiar? Insert the word Man instead of skeptic and I think it sounds like a phone sex conversation (not that I would really know LOL)

        I’m glad that you have a woo-less girlfriend already. IMO you should let her read the posts you have made about Anita the last few days. As a woman the words and tone you use makes me uncomfortable, I would think it would do the same for her.

      • Robo Sapien says:

        No worries, she sits right next to me and laughs at everything I write. That is why I am with her, no other woman would tolerate my piggish sense of humor.

      • Robo Sapien says:

        Oh, and please stop with the implication that I’m trying to be her “hero” — I explained my position above, and you are still branding me a skirt chaser. You said on JREF “maybe I am out of line here” and I believe that you are.

        Am I the only one who finds it worthwhile to try and get through to her, to tackle the root of the problem instead of fruitlessly beating it to death?

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Dear Susan,

        Sgerbic – “I think it is nice of [Robo Sapien] to “engage” her. I’m sure she is soooo lonely and needs someone to rescue her. “If only there were someone to talk to, a real skeptic, someone who could be my hero…” Sound familiar? Insert the word Man instead of skeptic and I think it sounds like a phone sex conversation (not that I would really know LOL)” How dare you Susan? How rude of you!

        Sgerbic – “I’m glad that you [Robo Sapien] have a woo-less girlfriend already. IMO you should let her read the posts you have made about Anita the last few days. As a woman the words and tone you use makes me uncomfortable, I would think it would do the same for her.” And as a woman, you should read about how your Mark seems to have fallen quite deeply for me, blog after blog, and even to the point of nearly losing his skepticism. Sorry, but you were mean first. I still like you though. I have hard to dislike people and I always think the best of them. That is why I even like my Jim Carr, but he, as all others, confuse kindness and affection with being manipulative and seductive and up to no good.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        MadScientist – “anyone investigating [Anita] should not have any other relationship with her; if they want a non-professional relationship with her then they should resign their position first.” And that is why, due to having attended two IIG meetings since the test, I am no longer eligible to apply for another test with the IIG.

    • Mark Edward says:

      Robo, you made my whole point beautifully. You are now feeling the woo.. Unless you are a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist you are in no position to “help” Anita. I’m sure you girlfriend would agree

      • Robo Sapien says:

        What about helping everyone else? She clearly has issues, and won’t stop until she finds some closure. Does it really take a degree in psychology to nudge her in the right direction? As a person with issues of my own, I know from experience that therapy is little more than steering a conversation so that the subject talks openly about the root causes, and autosuggestion does the rest.

        I realize that is not always the case, sometimes people need medication. If that is true of Anita, then I can do nothing for her. But I object to the notion that I am “feeling the woo” just because I refuse to be as dismissive as everyone else.

      • Mark Edward says:

        Robo- You are being drawn into her whole act. Can’t you see that? Yes, Anita needs to be seriously “steered toward a conversation that openly gets to the root causes.” That’s it. If she’s able to admit she has a problem she might avail herself of such outlets, (which I wouldn’t bet on)if not, she will continue to glomm onto people just like you. She’s beyond redemption from skeptics until she “see’s the light.”

      • Robo Sapien says:

        Yes, I can see it clear as day, but try and understand my perspective; once upon a time, I played this exact same game, only with different “powers” and different players. I was able to snap out of it and “see the light” – so I don’t find it entirely implausible that she can as well. I’m sure that eventually I will tire of it just as you have, but it is worth a shot in my opinion. Just don’t confuse me with some naive twit that is becoming the succubus’ victim.

      • Mark Edward says:

        Nobody would ever suggest you are anywhere near a naive twit Robo, but please bear in mind, people like Spenser Marks who was once a savvy L.A.P.D.officer has succumbed to her charms.As I told him months ago, beware. Medusa probably had a few who thought they could help her too…

      • Robo Sapien says:

        I understand, sir. I respect you very much, you are my favorite Skeptologist, and I am very grateful for your outlook and concern. I hope that, being a reformed person yourself, you can see where I am coming from with this.

        As such, I made this just for you.

        I hope you like it.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Mark – “but please bear in mind, people like Spenser Marks who was once a savvy L.A.P.D.officer has succumbed to her charms. As I told him months ago, beware. Medusa probably had a few who thought they could help her too…” I just ended a four-year long relationship and since half of the people I know and interact with are college students and the other half lately has been skeptics, and since I am only attracted to older men, you can do the calculations yourself. The attraction was mutual, and I do believe it was he who dropped the hint first. How do you know it was not the woo who succumbed to the charms of an LAPD officer? I am starting to believe, Mr. Edward, that perhaps you are just jealous and bickery.

    • Anita Ikonen says:

      Unfortunately, and the great irony is, that I am not making up the claim and none of it is done in order to win admiration or attention. The claim is real, I do see health perceptions and with uncanny accuracy and in cases that I can not explain or deny. That is not to say there won’t be a normal, as opposed to paranormal, explanation revealed. But there is no attention seeking or delusions involved. And I’ll be darned if a spare time investigation interest takes away all of my academic credentials, as I hold my spare time interests and professional life as entirely separate.

      Just because I get a lot of attention does not mean I intended it or that it was my plan. Similarly, just because skeptical men are falling for me also does not mean I’ve intended the distraction or inconvenience.

  3. Jim Carr says:

    Robo, we did not have a “fallout” at all. I don’t know you at all and had not dealt with you until you started yapping on the JREF Forums telling everyone else the best way to deal with Anita. I pointed out that your knowledge of the Ikonen Saga was comparable to reading the dust cover on “War and Peace” and advised you to do some research before telling everyone else what they are doing wrong. That still stands.

    Do whatever you want, but leave my name out of it. As a courtesy I will advise you to read up on Narcissistic Personality Disorder because your fourth paragraph is the same thing everybody thinks (at first) about people with NPD. Being recognized for “who they are” is never enough for the NPD – it’s at the root of the disorder. Telling somebody “just recognize how wonderful you are without all these fantastic abilities” is like telling an addict “just don’t smoke that crack” while handing them a rock.

    • Robo Sapien says:

      We didn’t have a falling out? (I see the bad terminology I used above) Could have fooled me, what with you inviting me to your own forum to engage in a flame war and all. I don’t know you either, but comments like yours above, calling my arguments ‘yapping’ and belittling my knowledge of this issue’s history, speak volumes about your ego, which I seem to have tread upon with post 312 of the “Put a fork in her” thread. That is the point at which you turned your daggers at me, and asserted that having not spent 40 hours (your own estimate) reading your site, that I have nothing of value to say on the matter, of which you have clearly elected yourself the indisputable authority. I only joke about passing judgement on people, you appear to have no qualms about doing so for real. You have no interest in helping anyone, only helping yourself be the clear “winner” in every disagreement.

      I acknowledge that I am a pompous windbag, it is simultaneously a fault and a virtue. I also understand that I used “true skeptics” in the wrong context – I should have said “participants in the skepticism movement” to avoid any obfuscation. I only pointed out the futility of continuing to fuss with her about her claims. I started out in that thread doing the same as you, harping on technicalities, until I recognized the futility and then switched to satire mode. Further down the line, I also recognized the futility of trying to reach a common ground with you, and similarly stopped taking you seriously. I find it laughable that you say “leave my name out of it” in an arena where you’ve made yourself the #1 contender.

      And thank you for your concise diagnosis of NPD, Dr. Jim. I was a fool for telling everyone how to deal with Anita, when it is so painfully obvious that you are the one who has it all figured out.

  4. Beelzebud says:

    I guess I don’t get it. Why is the skeptic community still engaging this person? The original video of her diagnosing people was an open and shut case. I agree with you, Mark. If she wasn’t good looking, she’d be in trashbin of psychic history.

    I didn’t realize so much drama was going on about this, but I never read the JREF forums.

    • Mark Edward says:

      Yes, drama is the word for it and if she’s good at anything, she’s a master at creating that. Unfortunately, I’m not sure it’s intentional or consciously spewed out by her. If it is, she should get into doing mentalism. We need more female mentalists – she would get the attention she so dearly wants, and the world would be treated to another Anna Eva Fay, who traveled the world stages and played to kings and queens during the 1850′. Now THAT would be a happy ending.

      • MadScientist says:

        Such a pity; I think she could do very well putting on a mentalist show and teaching the public about how it’s all bullshit. I’m sure people would rather watch her than Sylvia Browne.

  5. Ashles says:

    Amusing to watch Robo being played in exactly the way he doesn’t think he is. Just like several before him…

  6. kabol says:

    I guess I don’t get it. Why is the skeptic community still engaging this person?

    i was thinking the same thing — ie: how can super-smart SKEPTICS be so gullible??

    i have never run across this person online — or maybe i have – perhaps it’s more than one person working an angle?

    dunno, but male or female – i would never be swayed by some “save me” BS.

    • MadScientist says:

      Some people are too soft I guess. I tend to go “get a life, loser!”

      • Sgerbic says:

        Apparently it takes a very special kind of man. I didn’t understand this until recently that there are men out there who feel a strong desire to rescue women. I guess they feel stronger and more wanted/needed towards the woman.

        I have never played this game with a man, actually I didn’t know it existed (I am rather naive). Women I have known throughout my life that had acted this way to men I have just shunned and ridiculed. Something rather sad to see a man in this kind of woman’s power.

        But I guess as badly as this type of woman needs a man to rescue her, these men need a woman to rescue. So there is someone out there for everyone, maybe just not always a healthy relationship.

        I think most of us women have her number. And I’m not talking cell phone number.

      • MadScientist says:

        Too much Disney as a kid maybe? It’s always Prince Charming …

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Stop it everyone. I am investigating a claim and you are getting it all confused.

    • SDR says:

      This is a bit off topic, but important. Your commend bothers me. As a skeptic, I have a problem with the stereotype of “super smart skeptics.” Although super smart people /may/ tend to be skeptics, it is not a prerequisite for skepticism. One doesn’t have to be exceedingly smart or have a large amount of knowledge to be a skeptic. One simply has to look at evidence and make conclusions in a skeptical manner. Having such a stereotype about our own group just makes us look like the pompous elitists our critics claim we are.

      I too fall into that trap occasionally, but I recommend we all do our best to avoid it.

      I know many very good skeptics who aren’t “super smart” but still use skeptical tools to gain knowledge about the world.

      • SDR says:

        That should say “comment,” not “commend.”

      • kabol says:

        @SDR — sorry, i am a sucker for alliteration and every skeptic i’ve run across certainly seems to be quite intelligent.

        for some reason anita reminds me of someone named beatrice that i’ve run across online in the past…

        not being psychic myself, i’m just picking up on some nuance of manipulation in the choice of verbiage.

  7. xiphos says:

    If I read this correctly there seems to be some, at the very least, questionable activities happening between investigators and this “psychic” person, correct?

    • Sgerbic says:

      well….not really. She is now dating someone from the IIG but apparently they got together after the testing.

  8. Seth Manapio says:

    I’m trying–yet failing–to imagine a world in which I give a shit about Anita Ikonen.

  9. Citizen Wolf says:

    Robo has to ask himself if he’d be spending so much time trying to help Anita if she was short fat and unattractive. Everyone has weak-points, and it seems to me that some wishfull thinking is going on here. I don’t think having a girlfriend dispels the doubts on that front.

    • Michael Kingsford Gray says:

      Quite frankly, that is none of your business.

      • Mark Edward says:

        Quite frankly, yes it is. What Anita does in her bedroom is her business. When she makes unsupported paranormal medical claims or attempts to sway the evidence by using that same room, it becomes a problem.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Mark!! How dare you suggest that I am using my private life to alter the evidence for or against my claim! My relationship with my Skeptic does nothing to alter the evidence. Besides, he remains one of the most skeptical against my claims, and it is he who is changing me, not the other way around. And he won’t even take me ghost hunting no matter how I try.

        And if you think I would be flirting with Skeptics to try to “win them over”, trust me I can flirt better than that and you would know it if I did. I do think people are misinterpreting me.

      • kabol says:

        My relationship with my Skeptic does nothing to alter the evidence.

        which “relationship” with which skeptic?

        it sounds like you’ve tried a few.

        And if you think I would be flirting with Skeptics to try to “win them over”, trust me I can flirt better than that and you would know it if I did.

        somehow i don’t doubt that you can “flirt even better” and would do so if it would help your p$ychic $tudie$.

        I do think people are misinterpreting me.

      • kabol says:

        I do think people are misinterpreting me.

        oops, forgot to address that statement…

        i don’t think so.

        although i do have a hard time with the idea of any serious skeptic being gullible when it comes to “woo” wiles, i suppose the idea of male skeptics being susceptible to feminine wiles is pretty much a gender given.

      • Jim Carr says:

        You have flirted with skeptics, Anita. In fact in our private chats you said things, “Btw I’m naked. LOL Just got out of the shower” and “On some of them [pictures] you can see my boobs… I mean, how big they are. I bet Sylvia Browne never said that” and “Alright UncaYimmy. Call me on the phone now. If you do I’ll show you my boobs. Eventually.”

        You later publicly accused me of sexually harassing you and lied when you said you were an innocent victim.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Jim Carr says,
        “You have flirted with skeptics, Anita. In fact in our private chats you said things, “Btw I’m naked. LOL Just got out of the shower” and “On some of them [pictures] you can see my boobs… I mean, how big they are. I bet Sylvia Browne never said that” and “Alright UncaYimmy. Call me on the phone now. If you do I’ll show you my boobs. Eventually.”

        You later publicly accused me of sexually harassing you and lied when you said you were an innocent victim.”

        Mr. Carr how appropriately you twist things to appear in your favor. I was engaging in skeptical discussions with you, and YOU were the one who begun flirting with me. What was it that you said something about college girls? You then also asked me to send you topless pictures of me, which I declined, especially since you are a married man with two children.

        I did say those things, but why would you omit the things that you said? I was also merely teasing you. If I were truly flirting, you would have material you could not post publicly.

        Also I do not regard you as a Skeptic. You are just a man with personal opinions, and an agenda, picking on the one science student who is investigating an interesting experience of medical perception, rather than you going after the truly harmful woo who charge people money and ask for people to believe in their powers. I do none of such things, I am merely investigating.

        And when you run out of “stuff” to use against the claims in a truly skeptical manner, you then turn to personal slander such as of a sexual nature, you have deliberately tried to make me say things and tried to provoke me into behavior that I do not do, only so that you could find material against the claim.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        I have only dated one Skeptic. And my interest in a Skeptic can only come from my background in science, from which we share a common ground in critical thinking and investigation.

        Please leave my personal life out of this. The claim can be evaluated on its own, and my personal life neither supports nor discredits it.

      • Anita Ikonen says:

        Besides, Jim Carr is the man who writes flirtateous and sexually suggestive comments when ever in his personal role. I do recall several such examples in his Facebook page, such as how he would like to have sex with the babysitter. And while I was taking the IIG test, Jim revealed his personal and unskeptical side in his Chat log of the IIG test, commenting far more on my physical appearance in a highly inappropriate and offensive manner, than making comments related to the test itself or in skepticism.

        Anyone is welcome to visit my Facebook page, or is invited to get to know me in my personal form, to see that I am not the person as portrayed by these Skeptics who run out of dirt against the claim itself, and who then resort to tactics such as a personal defamation campaign based on false allegations and misinterpretation of character.

        But do be reminded, skepticism is a cousin of science, and cases are not won by the most libelously creative or aggressively persuasive, but facts stand alone and impersonally. The point is, even if I were the most flirtateous or sexually manipulative individual in all of the world, that would be entirely beside the point. And fortunately I am not such a person, so we can please all just focus on the claim itself, without these absurd diversions that arise from these men’s own personal fantasies, which I am not to be held responsible for, and which hold no weight against the claim.

  10. Anita Ikonen says:

    Mark, how dare you write such things about me! Your entire blog here focuses on what seems to be your personal attraction to me, and that is entirely beside the point! And I knew your previous blog about the woo seductresses was intended about me, whereas you were entirely denying it, but here you finally and clearly confess to that,

    Mark – “As I stated in my post “Sex in the Seance Room,” these dissolute distractions are nothing new in parapsychology”

    Gotcha! I knew it was about me and I was right! Besides, my affection of Skeptics is the same one I have of scientists, they are intelligent, focused, and conscious people, and as a future scientist – not woo – I find that an admirable quality. The fact that I am dating a Skeptic is quite normal for a science student, meanwhile as you try to construe me as a psychic woo, then in that case it would of course seem suspicious and arise to all of these thoughts that give you plenty of confusion, conspiracy, and material to write about.

    You are quite wrong about me, and what ever “female allure” I may possess, are entirely not intentional by me, and are to be considered entirely irrelevant in matters when dealing with a paranormal investigation, even if it be just a casual and quick test at dinner. Your multiple “compliments” to me come across as nothing but an insult. An insult against my intelligence, and against what are my intentions with this investigation I have of my claim. Your perception of me as a seductress does not make me so.

    Mark – “She has a bright future as a pretty face and she should make the best of that.” I am a double-major science student and headed toward a career in physics, and you know that, yet you keep insisting that I do modeling, and I must say I am deeply offended by your shallow remarks and complete disregard of my chosen career path that has got nothing to do with looks, and all to so with what your intellect is capable of.

    Mark – “In such rare instances, knees begin to wobble and all the best intentions and convictions may get thrown to the wind. That’s how psychics work.” And you were supposed to turn the other way, like I told you to! I normally use no interaction with the Skeptic I am reading (and yes, I mean Skeptic, as Skeptics are the only ones I read, and not to “woo” them nor to infiltrate their secret camps, but simply because they are less likely to be harmed by potentially inaccurate health information, and are more likely to let me know when I am wrong).

    Mark – “Charisma can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands. Manipulative personalities who have successful careers as psychics or mediums are literally full of it.” I wish for my claim to be judged solely on the content of the readings, and any personal distractions or peculiarities of my outer appearance or mannerism is to be entirely disregarded, as it does not add to the evaluation of my claim. Please do not confuse your being distracted by my personal quirks, as my intention of doing so.

    You say my “readings” are not good enough for psychic entertainment business, but I could not be more delighted, since that is not my plan after all! I am merely investigating, and I have more to learn about what it is I see. You are clearly biased and blinded by your own past in the woo industry, expecting anything else that you recognize from your own work, to be just that. I experience visual and felt health information, and I am trying to find out more about it.

    You say “Nobody made any further invitations for [...] dinner dates with [Regen] did they?” Dear Mark! I really thought we were having dinner as friends! After all my boyfriend is the one who set it up for us as a double date! How dare you reduce me to some psychic skank. I am a whole person, and outside of this paranormal investigation I am so much more. Ask my boyfriend and he will tell you who I am outside of the claim.

    Mark – “[...] and the inevitable excuses that follow each of her “tests.”” I have had only one test, Mark. And that was the IIG test. And both of the excuses I made there were based on issues I identified during the test, and as the “soon to be released IIG documents” will show I presented those excuses very clearly and during the test, well before the results were established, making them valid excuses to make, and not something constructed after the fact, as you seem to state here.

    Mark – “And yes, I will admit that I was initially charmed into her game like many others. There is no doubt that when an attractive woman levels her smouldering Swedish green-eyed leer at you and you are unaware of the strings that might be attached to it, any red-blooded American male would be hard pressed to remain skeptical for too long.” Insults, Mark. Insults.

  11. Manbearpig says:

    I totally missed the part where she is hot.