Jeane Dixon and "prediction" of J.F.K. assassinati

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-12-07 04:57pm

My psychology teacher brought this up in class today, saying it was the only "true" occurence of precognition he had ever heard of.

He said that a so-called psychic, Ms. Jeane Dixon predicted the assassination of J.F.k. down to the date and place where it actually happened, more than a year in advance.

I, of course, raised my hand, and pointed out that her having ties to the assassin, and therefore knowing his plan was a far better explanation.

He responded with the fact that she "predicted" it would happen in Dallas, before the administration had made the plans to go there.

I was unable to respond, since he immediately went onto something else, but it seems to me that Ms. Dixon having ties to the assassin, and simply making a lucky guess is a far better explanation than what he offered.

I'm wondering though if anyone here has any more information on this, and any insight they could lend me, as I intend to make sure he doesn't get off so easy if he happens to mention this again, which is almost assuredly guaranteed.

Turin · Post by **Turin** » 2005-12-07 05:23pm

Google is your friend As usual with any claim of this nature, this is basically bullshit.[/url]

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-12-07 06:11pm

Just a bit of wondering. Why the hell is it brought up in psychlogy class?

Was it to examine the event as what it does to the general people when they hear of such things or was this a lecture pertaining to "precognitive powers"?

Because the first I could understand, the second is bullshit science any way you cut it.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-12-07 06:53pm

The more and more I listen to this teacher, the more and more I'm starting to think that he's a crackpot.

Luckily for him, it's nothing more than a high school extra credit course. If he were teaching this at a University, I have no doubt that the administration would throw him out on his ass.

He does seem generally skeptical of most well known "occurences" of precognition, but he seems to believe that precog is actually possible.

He was explaining the human brain to us today, naturally he went through its cognitive abilities and post-cognitive abilities. He then covered pre-cognitive abilities, talking as if such a thing was actually possible.

And as I said, he believes Ms. Dixon's "prediction" to be an actual example of precog.

I'm also very much getting the feeling that he's a bullshitter. For someone who speaks so authoritavely on scientific matters, he demonstrated complete ignorance of how science works today, when he stated that Stephen Hawking was undoubtedly smarter than Einstein, because he came up with more advanced theories.

While he did, and I'm not contesting the fact that Hawking is indeed a genius, these kinds of comparisons are always tricky, since Hawking obviously had access to a lot more already established scientific knowledge than Einstein ever did. I know this, and I haven't even finished high school yet, yet this kind of obviousness didn't even seem to occur to him.

Of course, he also insists that Mother Thereasa is the biggest genius of the 20th century, so it's not like him spewing bullshit is unexpected.

And get this: Today was only the second day of this course. I can't even begin to imagine the bullshit he has in store.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-12-07 07:29pm

Wow...second day and he's pulling that?!

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2005-12-07 11:40pm

MOTHER FUCKING THERESA?

What the fuck did she do? She refused to give a bunch of sick people medical care in lieu of Bibles. Name me one intelligent thing she did.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2005-12-07 11:58pm

He probably believes the Catholic Church's awsome PR campaign and is ignorant to the truth on that matter. Let's assume that it all true and Theresa is a selfless saint that cared about the poor and the sick and didn't spend inordinate amounts of time promoting religion and distributing bibles rather than helping the poor and the sick:
It still doesn't cut it, how does being all kind, caring, and organizing a successful charity imply that a person is genious? Hardworking honorable, and having some level of intelligence (organizing good charities is not exacly easy), perhaps. However, if lyou want genious you might want to try things like Erwin Rommel (military), Marx Plank, Enrico Fermi, Oppenheimer (physists), the two dudes that uncovered the genome (with the help of a few photograpsh taken without permission) but not some charity organizer.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-12-08 12:15am

Ghost Rider wrote:Wow...second day and he's pulling that?!

Yup. And I get the feeling that this is only the beginning.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:MOTHER FUCKING THERESA?

What the fuck did she do? She refused to give a bunch of sick people medical care in lieu of Bibles. Name me one intelligent thing she did.

Exactly. As far as I can tell, all of her "good deeds" were death bed conversions. With all the money donated to her, she never built any hospitals, bought any medicine, or hired any doctors. How this makes her a good person is beyond me

Even if she was a great person and did things for humanity, it doesn't make her a genius.

Example: Terry Fox got cancer and had his leg amputated. He jogged across Canada on one real leg, one fake leg to rasie money for cancer research. He died during this fundraiser, as the cancer had spread to his lungs. He has my utmost respect. But as far as I know, he wasn't a genius, and such a claim would have no basis in reality.

Kettch · Post by **Kettch** » 2005-12-08 11:24pm

1982: Persuades Israelis and Palestinians to stop shooting long enough to rescue 37 retarded children from a hospital in besieged Beirut.

From CNN

Well that rates above idiot.

From the website for her canonization(Yes I under stand this is best foot foward stuff):

In 1952 the first Home for the Dying was opened in space made available by the City of Calcutta. Over the years, Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity grew from 12 to thousands serving the "poorest of the poor" in 450 centers around the world. Mother Teresa created many homes for the dying and the unwanted from Calcutta to New York to Albania. She was one of the pioneers of establishing homes for AIDS victims. For more than 45 years, Mother Teresa comforted the poor, the dying, and the unwanted around the world.

In 1966, the Missionaries of Charity Brothers was founded. Homes began to open in Rome, Tanzania, and Australia. In 1971, the first home in the United States was established in the South Bronx, New York.

Mother Teresa gained worldwide acclaim with her tireless efforts on behalf of world peace. Her work brought her numerous humanitarian awards, including : the Pope John XXIII Peace Prize and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979. In receiving this award, Mother Teresa revolutionized the award ceremony. She insisted on a departure from the ceremonial banquet and asked that the funds, $6,000 be donated to the poor in Calcutta. This money would permit her to feed hundreds for a year.

She is stated to have said that earthly rewards were important only if they helped her help the world’s needy.

Beginning in 1980, homes began to spring-up for drug addicts, prostitutes, battered women, and more orphanages and schools for poor children around the world. In 1985, Mother Teresa established the first hospice for AIDS victims in New York. Later homes were added in San Francisco and Atlanta. Mother Teresa was awarded Medal of Freedom, the highest U.S. civilian award.

Emphisis Mine.

I don't know how much of the administration of the whole organization she did, 450 locations in multiple continents is a -d-a-m-n- er blessedly hard thing to do.

If you want some criticism check out the [urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa]Wikipedia[/url].[/quote]

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2005-12-08 11:59pm

Yeah, 450 hospices for people to be converted after they've got terminal illnesses. Yay?

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2005-12-09 05:39am

Ask your teacher where these psychics were on 9-11-01? Or when Challenger blew up. Or when Katrina decimated New Orleans. Is he suggesting the assasination of one man was a bigger "bell-ringer" to psychics than these other events?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2005-12-09 11:54am

How come Jenae Dixon hasn't had any OTHER "genine predictions" of events?

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-12-09 06:06pm

Ask your teacher where these psychics were on 9-11-01? Or when Challenger blew up. Or when Katrina decimated New Orleans. Is he suggesting the assasination of one man was a bigger "bell-ringer" to psychics than these other events?

I like it. It doesn't require lots of explanation of logic and the burden of proof, which means I won't just draw blank stares from the class (and probably from him as well).

Thanks.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:How come Jenae Dixon hasn't had any OTHER "genine predictions" of events?

He acknowledges that, and claims that despite that, that the true mark of a psychic is predicting the time and place of a death.

Yes, idiocy, I know.

On Monday, he's supposed to cover Creationism vs Evolution. If I never return after that, it's probably safe to assume I died of brain hemmoraging partway through the class.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-12-09 06:38pm

Honestly it's funny shit like this that you either ace the class because the teacher is insane, or you leave because same thing.

As for psychics not detecting other events, the sad part is they will always go "They did but no one listened!!!" It is the classic one liner. Better focus upon the object he's putting his eggs into and crush him on the fact, that her evidence was akin to Nostradamus.

He acknowledges that, and claims that despite that, that the true mark of a psychic is predicting the time and place of a death.

The point to kill him upon is his best piece he's brought forth is Dixon and her prediction was: "As for the 1960 election Mrs. Dixon thinks it will be dominated by labor and won by a Democrat. But he will be assassinated or die in office though not necessarily in his first term."

She brought up no place, and a time span of 8 years.

As for other predictions, the ones she got correct were of the same vein. Vague possibilites that were possible in the time.

Now for Creationism vs Evolution should be fun, if he's stupid enough to believe wild and vague yabberings are accurate demonstrations of precognitive awareness.

Kettch · Post by **Kettch** » 2005-12-10 01:22am

Ghost Rider wrote: The point to kill him upon is his best piece he's brought forth is Dixon and her prediction was: "As for the 1960 election Mrs. Dixon thinks it will be dominated by labor and won by a Democrat. But he will be assassinated or die in office though not necessarily in his first term."

She brought up no place, and a time span of 8 years.

As for other predictions, the ones she got correct were of the same vein. Vague possibilites that were possible in the time.

From the wikipedia

Dixon was so well-known that John Allen Paulos, a mathematician at Temple University, coined what he called the "Jeane Dixon effect", in which people loudly tout a few correct predictions and overlook false predictions. Many of Dixon's forecasts proved false, such as her prediction that World War III would begin in 1958 over the offshore Chinese islands of Quemoy and Matsu, that labor leader Walter Reuther would run for president in 1964 and that the Soviets would land the first man on the moon.

I'm not aware if anyone has done a systematic study of her predictions & there accuracy, though Skeptical Inquirer does end of year prediction round ups.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2005-12-11 12:17am

Yes, ask him about why she has so many FALSE predictions.