SkepticblogSkepticblog logo banner

top navigation:

The Genuine And Legitimate Psychic Medium List

by Mark Edward, Jun 12 2010

Bob Olson: Medium Watchdog

Yep, you read it right. You don’t have to go far or ask for any of that fancy-smantzy “certified” stuff with this website. Why? Because the owner Bob Olson says his psychics are all genuine and legitimate, that’s why! The by-line reads: “Improving The Reputation of Spirit Mediumship.”   Boy, there’s a big job I’d say. When I  Googled “Best Psychic Mediums,” Bob’s site popped up faster than I could say boo.

Like other scam artists who say they are “on your side,'” or only use “certified psychics” and caution their potential clients with fuzzy admonitions of superiority and benevolence, Bob’s site spares no expense to remind us that:

“Important Notice: We get many emails asking if we have a psychic medium recommendation for locations not listed. Unfortunately we do not, but Bob Olson believes it is safer to get a “phone” reading with a genuine and legitimate psychic medium than an in-person reading with a possible phony or scam artist. Plus, phone readings can be better for skeptics since the medium can not gain information about you based on your appearance or body language.”

Well dang! If Bob believes it, it must be true! Bob Olson wouldn’t want any of those nasty un-genuine non-listed illegitimate psychic scammers out there to check out our shoes, jewelry or body language. Heck no! That would be too much work. The real legit psychics on Bob’s list will talk to you right over the telephone where there is no chance you could be scammed that way!

Additionally, good scout Bob Olson tells us:

“Bob’s mission is to lead people to the reputable and gifted psychic mediums so that anyone desiring to communicate with spirits will not be fooled by phonies, frauds and scam artists. He works hard to find the most experienced psychic mediums because there are so many inexperienced, although gifted, psychic mediums who do not yet know how to use their gifts responsibly.”

What a fine upstanding citizen Bob Olson is. He’s Robin Hood in a turban isn’t he? And such a leader among so much irresponsibility! Imagine him going to all that trouble and working so hard for all of us! His bio says he’s the founder of “Grief and Belief.” Now there’s a sure shot business for any enterprising entrepreneur. He has also written the forward to a book called “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Communicating with Spirits.” That’s right. I’m not making this up. I wonder if it’s an autobiography?

If my tone sounds sarcastic, I’m afraid my frustration in all this has allowed it to bubble to the surface of my mind. Like the exibits I mentioned last week at The Museum of Jurassic Technology, it’s getting more difficult day by day to sift through all the cons and know who is conning who.It has become impossible to keep up with all the woo without falling back to some level of humor. It’s how I cope.

If I didn’t know better, (and I’m not sure at this point whether I do or not) I might think that Bob Olson’s site and its founder are a complete hoax. I have made suggestions for guerilla operations that could take advantage of such cultural simplicity. Anyone can build a fictitious medium web page. The only problem with this plan is once the website is up and generating interest, then what? What do you do when you have merely attracted a bunch of sad psychic junkies; sting them? To what purpose could that possibly serve other than patting ourselves on the back over something we knew from the start is so easy to do? No, the truth is that the only reason someone would go to all the trouble is to get a new angle on conning the miserable people who are so desperate for help they would call a doctor named Whynot.

In his less-than inspiring message on grief and death, Bob also wants us to know:

“In approximately six years of investigating the possibility of life after death, I have discovered convincing evidence that there really is an afterlife, that we really do continue to exist after death, and that our loved ones continue to watch over us and guide us in the spirit world. But this is just the begining of my discoveries.”

Right Bob. I bet it is. He’s just recently discovered how to make a quick buck by conning the bereaved into believing he’s on to the real deal with all his genuineness.

And what about that “approximately six years?” Bob can’t even give us an exact time line about his investigations of life and death? Never mind the forty years Randi has spent taking these claims apart or the decades of scientific evidence about mediumship to the contrary. Bob knows all. He has a list and a website.

His list starts out with this glowing testimonial:

“The following psychic mediums, whom have been personally tested by Bob Olson, are all extraordinarily gifted with the ability to communicate with spirits. Just like celebrity psychic mediums such as John Edward and James VanPraagh.”

That statement makes everything just dandy doesn’t it? Each psychic has been personally tested by a six year veteran in the field and they are just like two of the biggest frauds in the history of charlatanism.


Could we be further up the creek without a paddle? Was this level of hokum we see every day always around? Or are we just seeing more and more of it as the Internet and stupid media become more and more accepted? The insanity just goes on and on and on: the Dodgers hired Russian psychic Vladimir Shpunt to send positive energy to Doger Stadium, Psychic Judy Hevenly has predicted that the ghost of Michael Jackson will hover over the 2010 music awards and BP’s CEO Tony Hayward wants his life back. Am I the only person floating around in some sort of alternate universe?


But wait. There is hope:


My Quija Board is spelling out a message for you right now. The letters are:

…P…R…O…V…E…   …I…T…

The spirits are telling me (genuinely) to save time and money, to discover your true inner self and increase your cash flow exponentially: accept either the Randi or IIG challenge and STEP UP TO BIG PAY. $50,000 or a cool million could be yours when you give us the same evidence you promise from your six years of investigation and hard work. Humanity is waiting. This could truly be the REAL begining of your discoveries.

…D…O…   …I…T…   …B…O…B..

AND THIS JUST IN: The episode of “Weird or What?”that Jim Underdown of CFI and I recorded last month ran last night (June 10) on The Discovery Channel at 8:00p.m. & 11:00p.m. I haven’t seen it yet, but have heard everything looked good. Just in case there are any magicians lurking out there reading this: this time out I didn’t reveal a damn thing. Any reveals were due to unflattering angles and pure conjecture on the part of the crew.  So there!

AND THEN THERE’S THIS JUST IN: Today (6/14/10) I checked the Indiana News Extra Desk web page and lo and behold, former ABC staff medium and remote viewer Kelli Faulkner is no longer listed among the stations “experts.” I’m chalking this up as a big point for skeptics. We can make a difference! I’m not sure if this was Kelli’s own idea or whether ABC decided to pull the plug. Whatever. I may try to call Kelli again and get the story, but it’s likely to be her side of it. Keep Doing The Real Work!

33 Responses to “The Genuine And Legitimate Psychic Medium List”

  1. Genuine and legitimate. Right. I think it’s time we humored the tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nuts by packing people into the alleged FEMA trains and shipping them off into the desert. Time to cull the human population in an effort to spare us from these idiots breeding.

  2. Just Looking says:

    OK, now that I’ve stopped laughing and cleaned up the spilled coffee
    I have to ask, “Plus, phony readings can be better for skeptics”. Typo or intentional?

  3. oldebabe says:

    `Whynot’? “I don’t believe it. I simply don’t believe it.”

    • Mark Edward says:

      If you don’t believe it, Google it: Bob Olson or “Best Psychic Mediums.” It’s all there. I couldn’t bring myself to typing in the web address,

  4. Chip Cherry says:

    I’ve always thought it funny that there’s this insistence that our departed loved ones watch over and guide us. As is we can’t get along without them! Oh the arrogance and conceit of dead people…

    You’d think they would have more pressing matters.

  5. steelsheen11b says:

    It’s at times like these that i can’t help but think of one Stan Marsh and his insightful words about John Edwards in the South Park episode The Biggest Douche in the Universe. I quote below.

    “You see, I learned something today. At first I thought you were all stupid, listening to this douche’s advice, but now I understand that you’re all here because you’re scared. You’re scared of death and he offers you some kind of understanding. You all want to believe in it so much, I know you do. You find comfort in the thought that your loved ones are floating around trying to talk to you, but think about it: Is that really what you want? To just be floating around after you die, having to talk to this asshole? We need to recognize this stuff for what it is – magic tricks. Because whatever’s really going on in life and in death is much more amazing than this douche”

    Truer words have not been spoken by man nor cartoon.

  6. Mark,

    I seem to have gotten myself into a bit of a debate on another blog site with Don Salmon. Reading your post above, I wanted to send this off to you to hear what your response to this is. Pure ranting? Or is there even a hint of truth in anything this guy alleges?

    frank jude

    66. don Salmon – June 11, 2010
    Hi again:

    Whenever one writes about parapsychology on the net, someone always brings up Randi’s “Million Dollar Challenge.” It’s a hoax. Randi has admitted as much: “I always have a way out.” I’ve briefly detailed this here: but if you are interested in more detail, you can google “George Hansen”. The best book on psi, I think – by far – is Chris Carter’s “Parapsychology and the Skeptics”, which came out in 2007. It was 2 years too late for me. I had already completed a book which included 10 pages on psi, and he did a much much better job. I have been following the skeptic literature for more than 30 years, and he had things in that book I had never heard of. what a delight it was to hear that PSICOP (the leading psi skeptic organization, which now has changed its name) was initially formed as a **research** organization. It’s first project was examining some claims related to astrology. The research came out positive, and PSICOP immediately attempted to hide the results. Carl Sagan, among others with integrity, immediately resigned from the board. PSICOP then announced it would no longer do research, for fear (they actually said something like this, I don’t recall now the exact words) they might come up with some more troubling results!!!

    you can find stuff like this from all the skeptics. Susan Blakemore, when asked about psi, told people, “I don’t know.” In her autobiography, she wrote, “I don’t know. I don’t know! I don’t know!!” How much better Batchelor’s book would have been if he adopted Blakemore’s attitude.

    As for Ray Hyman and James Alcock, they have conspired together to suppress positive psi research on numerous occasions – in one case, doing so for a major project for the American government. And their names – for those of you who don’t believe in God, isn’t that proof enough that She has a great sense of humor?

    • Sgerbic says:

      It was CSICOP that changed its name. Randi did indeed say that he always has an out, its called “being right”. Ray Hyman did look into PSI studies, but I think they were cherry picking the studies (meta analysis) and he got results that were slightly leaning towards there being a result for PSI. There have been numerous articles written about his results.

      He has used the word “conspired” far too many times in his letter to take him seriously. Sagan resigning because CSICOP hid results is crazy talk.

      I’m just finishing my breakfast and am off to work now, this is all just off the top of my head. I don’t see anything credible about any of what this man wrote. Never heard of the books he is talking about.

      Someone else?

      • Sgerbic says:

        “Parapsychologists such as Dean Radin and Daryl Bem say that ganzfeld experiments have yielded results that deviate from randomness to a significant degree, and that these results present some of the strongest quantifiable evidence for telepathy to date.[4] Critics such as Susan Blackmore and Ray Hyman say that the results are inconclusive, and call for further study before such results can be scientifically accepted.” from

    • MadScientist says:

      It sounds like Salmon has been smoked with the wrong stuff.

      • Don Salmon says:

        Hi folks:

        Carl Sagan did not make any attempt to hide his disdain for CSICOP’s attempt to hide the results of their 1 research project. There are many sources, but I found Chris Carter’s to be quite credible.

        As for my conversation with Frank, the main point I was making – Frank, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this – was that to date, I haven’t found a credible response to Richard Wiseman’s statement (earlier this year) that the main areas of parapsychology – telepathy, remote viewing, precognition and psychokinesis – have been, by the standards applied to ordinary science, proven.

        He stated this to an interviewer for a British newspaper and later repeated it in more detail on Alex Tsakiris’ Skeptico podcast. He then added that this was not enough to convince him regarding anomalous cognition, because “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” – often attributed to Carl Sagan, but Sagan heard this from Marcello Truzzi, who in recent years has critized the use of this in regard to paranormal research as inappropriate.

        Regardless of what “extraordinary” means in this context, I have yet to hear a skeptic who considers themself to be a rational, reasonable person, respectful of scientific endeavor, attempt to come to grips with Wiseman’s statement. As my wife and I are preparing some videos on the topic of materialism and skeptics, I’m very interested in hearing a reasonable, calm, mindful (in the Buddhist sense, as Frank teaches so wonderfully) dialog on this. Thanks.

  7. MadScientist says:

    Unflattering camera angles is no excuse; you should know where the cameras are. :P

    Speaking of ouija boards, I’ve been itching to build one into a table. I want it to be a genuine one with two motors driving a magnetic device which pulls the shuttle (or whatever it’s called) along. It would have to be controlled by a computer via a radio link. It’s got to be built into a card table or something though so there’s a plausible excuse for the thickness of the board.

  8. Trish Whynot says:

    It is my name. I happened to have married it 29 years ago and really enjoy it, as do my children who are now adults. Thanks for not asking. And I do help those who have a need to rake someone through the coals who they don’t even know.

  9. - says:

    #1 – Trish Whynot is not a psychic.
    #2 – She is my mom and Whynot is my last name too, and not a “goofy nickname”.
    #3 – You may want to get your facts straight before you post your “blogs”.

  10. Mark Edward says:

    The offending parts of my blog post referring to Mrs Wynot’s name have been removed. I hope you will all sleep better now. Let’s be clear and get our facts straight about the real point of this blog though okay? Your mom is listed in a special box at the bottom of a webpage entitled “The Genuine and Legitimate Psychic medium List,” declaring:

    “Spiritual Meditation & Counseling: Dr. Trish Whynot uses meditation with her clients for healing. Trish taught Bob how to communicate with his loved ones in spirit, his spirit guides and even his higher self using meditation. Highly recommended for the grieving! Click the link to read about Bob’s first amazing experience with Trish–guaranteed to fascinate you.”

    You may not think she is a psychic, but she’s claiming to TALK TO DEAD PEOPLE.

    • Sgerbic says:

      Good for you Mark.

      “A psychic (pronounced /ˈsaɪkɨk/; from the Greek ψυχικός psychikos—”of the soul, mental”, also called sensitive[1]) is a person who professes an ability to perceive information hidden from the normal senses through extrasensory perception, or is said by others to have such abilities.”

      I wonder what part of communicating with dead people in “spirit” (whatever that means) is not psychic?

      If you can prove that your mom has these “powers

      • Sgerbic says:

        If you can prove that your mom has these “powers” or even that the dead can communicate with the living. Then guess what? A MILLION dollars is waiting for you. Heck not JUST the million dollars, the whole science community would bow down at your feet. You will be featured on every TV/newspaper/radio across the world. You will win the Nobel Prize.

        The announcement that you have PROOF that the dead can communicate with the living would be bigger than if we had PROOF that there are life forms on other planets that want to communicate with us. It would be bigger news than if we had started cloning people. Bigger news than cats and dogs raining from the sky. Do you think you can produce even a shred of evidence?

        Otherwise you are just talking through your hat.

  11. Trish Whynot says:

    So interesting that you can paint such a vivid picture of me, who you’ve never even talked to and then judge me. That is a perfect example of what I consider to be spirit communication, well, lack of communication in this case — your spirit judging mine. I just teach people to do it productively through meditation, rather than destructively through hurting someone. It is a very cool process that I take someone through and very revealing of the truth of the matter.

    In my belief, the Mark who would rather judge me than get to know me is not your higher self. Our higher self knows there is a gift in this for all involved and knows that time is better spent finding out why we have come together. Finding our gifts in life is fun and that is what my work is all about.

    If you ever want to talk without weapons, Mark, I’d be interested — spirit to spirit. Just be forewarned, I’m not a debater, I just like to seek understanding with those who desire to seek understanding too. There is always something to learn when people who desire understanding come together. And meditation is great for finding our gifts when the other person doesn’t want to or can’t talk with us — sometimes because they are deceased.

    I know in my heart that I do good work and that’s enough for me.

    Best to you, Mark, and best to me too.

    • Sgerbic says:

      Okay I’ve read it through twice. Can someone please explain what she is talking about? “Higher Self?” “Spirit to Spirit?” “Gifts?” (gifts from whom?)

      And I did notice she didn’t address why she is listed on a psychic page if she is not psychic.

      • Trish Whynot says:

        I’m listed as a counselor for the grieving, a resource.

        I just find it so interesting that you don’t ask me, the one who wrote the post.

        I think there are gifts to every encounter. You don’t have to believe what I do. I’m cool with that. And I don’t have to believe what you do. We just gravitate toward different groups and every group has its con artists. I just think that Mark chose the wrong person to prove a point with and that was what was unfortunate.

        Maybe your gift in this is in being presented with the term higher self? Maybe if you research it, it might change your life? And maybe your gift is in seeing the value in picking up the phone to ask a question rather than assume, judge and act based on your assumption? That’s how I’d look at it, but that’s just me. You might look at it differently and that’s your choice.

        Best to you!

      • Trish Whynot says:

        Oh … and spirit to spirit in my definition means addressing the person you have the issue with or have a question for, directly.

        In your post you looked to others for clarity on something I said. I’m not quite sure why people tend to do that — it makes things so complicated when they can be so simple.

        Did you want to know how I think or did you just want to hurt me?

  12. Trish Whynot says:

    Okay, one last post and I really do hope we can chat some time since I think we are both in pursuit of a more honest world…

    What WAS proven…

    When we don’t bother to get to know someone the picture we paint of them is more of a self-portrait than anything else. I think this was proven but I’d need your vote and it would require some soul searching which leads to my nest point…

    The positive effects of my meditative techniques were proven, because you could have lamb basted me meditatively to get that self-portrait view rather than publicly and no one would have been hurt. The impact of your demoralizing insinuation had ripples that unnecessarily touched me personally and professionally, however when I lamb basted you meditatively I did find some old wounds within myself and was able to provide closure to them. So thanks. And we could have also gotten there if you had bothered to pick up the phone to discuss the meaning of Bob’s comment rather than assuming. Either method would be spirit communication in my definition.

    We also proved that “assume makes an ass out of you and me.”

    I have a good sense of humor. I hope you do too.

  13. Mark Edward says:

    I’m very happy I was able to help you find yourself through this blog. I’m quite familar with my higher self and if you were in touch with me through spirit, you would have known that.

    Nothing was proven. Your defination of spirit is flummery of the silliest order. I suppose that “team spirit” is about ghosts and things that go bump in the night?

    There is no demnoralizing insinuation in calling out someone who professes to SPEAK WITH DEAD PEOPLE and can’t prove it to the satisfaction of an inquiring mind who asks for such proof.

    My inquiring mind is also quite familiar with meditation. If you are suggesting that you and I have had some sort of telepathic link-up through your use of meditation – “spirit to spirit,” I’m not aware of any change in my thoughts regarding people who say they can SPEAK WITH DEAD PEOPLE.

    Logically (sorry to bring that up, but some people think that way)there would be no need to pick up any phone at all if you could send me your thoughts or “spirit” or do any of the nonsense you and Bob Olson sell at your website – if there really is a Bob Olson. In fact, if such a thing a spirit to spirit direct communication were possible, I would have experienced it long ago without any help from you or any other “counselor for the grieving.”

    And please don’t try to tell me I’m not worthy or haven’t become humble enough to recieve such information. You have no idea where I have been and what I might have seen in my life. IOr do you? f you do, contact your spirit guides and tell me answers to any one of the following three questions please:

    1) What was the name of my first pet dog and,2)What did that dog used to do that was photographed by my parents when I was a child?(the image is VERY clear in my mind-spirit) 3)What was my half-brother’s dead father’s name? No intitals please.

    These are simple and “legitimate” enough questions for anybody who is listed on a “Genuine and Legitimate Psychic and Mediums List” to answer and no one would be happier than me if you could reach into your meditative realm of spirit and supply just one message. I would never insinuate or demoralize again, honest.

    So let’s have it.

    BTW: I have worked in the funeral business and know plenty of qualified grief counselors, and they neither profess the ability to SPEAK WITH DEAD PEOPLE or spend valuable time when people are in pain meditating on spirit communication to help them. These folks have real world credentials and provide professional ways to allow people who have lost a loved one to get through terrible times in their life withour recourse to anything supernatural or spiritual.
    If I have “picked the wrong person to prove my point,” I’m waiting for a spirit message to change my mind – now that’s cool.

  14. Trish Whynot says:

    As I said, I’m not a debater. Clearly you have your own definitions of spirit communication and meditation and you are not interested in mine.

    Best to you and to me.

  15. Mark Edward says:

    On the contrary, I’m intensely interested in your definition of spirit communication. If spirit moves from person to person through meditation as esaily as you say and has a qualifiable outcome that could be measured at a distance or through solid testing and scientific fact, you would be equipped to offer your services as a “Genuine and Legitimate Psychic Medium” as the banner now reads on the website you share with “Bob Olson.” You would also be in the position of turning the scientific community on its head, rending the fabric of space and time into shreds and generally making yourself and your spiritual mission the most important event in modern history. Until then, I put it to you, it’s all in YOUR HEAD.
    There’s no law against that in specific, so go ahaed and meditate on it and imagine what you will. But when you profess to help the grieving through imagined contact WITH DEAD PEOPLE, you will have to face one or two debates before people of conscience decide to accepet what your doing as legitimate. Care to share some proof, or is it merely fanciful (and profitable)speculation on your part?
    Clearly, like all mediums of the past; you are not a debater when it becomes anything you cannot defend with nonsense.
    Try again?
    BTW: Where’s Bob Olson in all this? Or is there even a real Bob to begin with?

  16. Hi Mark,
    There is a Bob Olson, I was the very first medium that started this whole deal. I even wrote a book with him. I was actually the first medium he had listed on his website as legitimate. That was until he began charging people a very large fee to be listed there! I advise people to not listen to people like that! I don’t believe you are wrong in questioning this. You would call me the same as you would any medium. You have the right, and people should respect that. It seems the ones that retaliate so much are the ones I question? If we are what we say we are…then why isn’t it something we should prove! I do agree with you on many of those things. I believe that perhaps money has blinded many, and everyone is now a medium! U can take classes! What a joke! I have said in my own blogs, no one is an expert in this, or can give tests, that’s such a crock of crap! I have stated so many times that if you want to know who’s real, give them (the mediums) nothing. No name, address, phone, cell phone, nothing! They have to tell you. That to me….is proof. And to think….I have guilt over this. I was the one that started this whole journey because I was so accurate. Now….I’m the one that is the cause of alot of this. Do I make a fortune….no way! I’m just doing my thing. It’s all I’ve ever done. I know what your job is and you do it well. And I have many peole around the globe that can’t afford the the A-list, we all have felt this should of happened, (your blog) a very long time ago. Skeptics have a right to question, and make those arguments. And we can argue right back. But if skeptics didn’t speak, everyone, would become a victim of something. I admire your tenacity in this. I hope people read more things like this. Being a Skeptic is just as healthy as being and feeling fulfilled in your life and your work, whether believed or not. Your blog was for me, very needed!

  17. qwyzl says:

    how to test a “psychic” – put “psychic” in empty room. the empty room should be next to another EMPTY room. tell fraud – oops, i mean “psychic”, there’s some one in the other empty room and to give that person a reading. soon as the fraud – oops, i mean “psychic”, starts giving a reading, have some one come in to the room where the fraud – oops, did it again – “psychic” is, and escort her/him to the EMPTY room. promptly have FRAUD arrested, thrown in prison and throw away the key. these CON ARTISTS should NEVER see the light of day again.

  18. DEBRA says:


  19. Use the tools offered on to evaluate Bob Olson’s statements. Fraud, fraud, fraud.

    FYI, I have no association whatsoever with I’m just very impressed with it.

  20. Noel says:

    Well here is another

  21. Briffault says:

    LoL, this article is probably the most arrogant one I’ve read in awhile. No better than Mr. Olson’s. You guys seriously need to step down a few rungs. Hilarious, and I thank you for the laughs.

  22. Carrie says:

    My daughter was about to leave school to do training as a psychic because an Australian Institute failed to tell her they were life coaches and didn’t have any official accreditation. These people are dangerous and can destroy family lives. I had to beg her to see reason after researching how they all boost each other up. Mr Bob Olsen has a best psychic directory in Australia as well and there is not one complaint about any of the psychics he recommends. I think he is a charlatan who is living off the takings off his recommendations and books and whatever else he earns recommending psychics. I’ve got a family falling apart because of this rubbish. The psychics on his website have complaints all over the web in Australia. I’d like to know how they passed his stringest test?

  23. Leia says:

    Bob Olson is a complete fraud. I’ve just gone through a complaint with Consumer Complaint Agency and they have censured him (case #6717159302). Unfortunately, one must use his business name so the general public will not know about this.
    I used one of his ‘stars’, Laura Scott, and she is a complete fake – all to the tune of $420. I rarely use psychics but because of his so called reputation, I used her. I went to Bob (it was not easy locating him) and he essentially blew me off, so I have been doing my best to alert the public to the fact that this man is defrauding the public and making a lot of money in the process. I have learned a hard lesson.