Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jun 25, 2008 in psychics | 11 comments

Sally Morgan – more bullshit

Incidentally, following on from previous post, I just checked out psychic Sally Morgan’s amazing video of her identifying, while blindfolded, the famous owner of a jacket at the Hard Rock Cafe London “vault” (where they keep several prized rock and roll relics: jackets, guitars, etc.). Sally fondles the jacket and gradually figures out – he’s was an artist, he’s dead. “I am seeing Paul McCartney.” “I can see the Dakota building in New York – it’s John Lennon!”

Even Sally is amazed at her astonishing ability. “Isn’t that unbelievable? I can’t believe I’ve done that!”

Well, maybe she went to visit the Cafe vault the previous week – entry free – and saw Lennon’s jacket there, a prized possession, hanging in a case. Then when she runs her hands all over it in this clip, she quickly figures out which of the exhibits it is.

This is just embarrassing crap. Go here to see the jacket.

I have already commented on Sally Morgan’s other amazing video clip on her website – involving Kim Marsh.

I’m not sure this sort of thing shouldn’t be illegal.

Go on Sally – if you are that good, take Randi’s challenge!

P.S. As you can see, Sally Morgan seriously pisses me off.


  1. Have you seen the first clip on the site? (“Sceptics and Cynics” or some such). Either she’s a better actress than Vanessa Redgrave or she really believes that she is doing it. One wonders whether the deception extends to subconsious self-deception.Anyway Derren Brown does these things way better! (This is quite unbelievable : )

  2. I think Sally knows what she is doing.She has already been caught speaking untruths – see here: is shown a picture of the person she is about to read: Big Brother celeb Brian Dowling, and asked if she knows him. “I know *of* him”. she says. Then she gives a so-so reading, stuff she could have known by doing a quick internet search on him.Except she’s only just been shown the photo and found out who she’s reading, so how could she do any research?Well, because she *has* met Dowling. In fact she had already given him a reading once before! This information was removed from her website, but can be found on the above link.Did Sally perhaps already know Dowling would be a potential subject on the show?This is how psychics like Sally do it – a combination of cold reading (fishing) and hot reading (research). Cold reading can be done without realizing you are doing it – but Sally’s also hot reading.The precise mechanics of what’s going on in Sally’s TV shows intrigues me. I’d love to be a fly on the wall. To what extent is the TV company, the researchers, Sally’s staff, etc. in cahoots?

  3. I’d like to see her do a head-to-head challenge with Derren Brown. Or just be scientifically tested rather than paraded round by ITV production companies. A lot of people are easily pleased by far-from impressive feats, and who knows what proportion of mistakes the editors remove in the name of exciting programming.

  4. Incidentally Tony, notice that Sally’s video “response to the sceptics” is to spend ages recounting an amazing feat – Sally picking up that an Australian woman’s husband’s name was “Tup”. But of course we simply have to take Sally’s word about what happened.And the accuracy of Sally’s memory of previous readings has already been shown to be, shall we say, rather unreliable!

  5. BTW, re. speaking untruths, I suppose Sally could insist that, regarding knowing Brian Dowling, “Well, I know *of* him” was not, strictly speaking, untrue. Just highly misleading.

  6. I’m not sure this sort of thing shouldn’t be illegal.Well, imagine I had a TV show where I explore the details behind a particular model of sportscar that few people have yet seen. In the first week I might discuss its revolutionary aerodynamic design, in the second week I would wax lyrical about its powerful engine, etc. The TV show quickly becomes a hit, and I earn a lot of money and fame from it.But what if, after a year or two, it subsequently emerged that the car didn’t exist, and (what’s more) that I had consistently known this despite making the TV shows?There would be an absolute public outcry, and I might very well be charged with fraud.And yet…

  7. Regarding whether psychics really think they can do it: footage of Dawkins’ documentary (forget its name) showed a dowser who gave a convincing impression of being flabbergasted at failing a dowsing task.I put this down to a psychological process, similar to what cold readers exploit: the false negatives are quickly glossed over and forgotten, whilst on the occasion you strike gold by chance, you never forget it and nor do the hapless witnesses. The effect works for practitioners and witnesses alike. Homo sapiens has a congenital problem with probability and chance, it seems.Having said that, there are frauds who know they are frauds and are simply coldly calculating how to make a few spondooliks. The question is, what proportion of those claiming to have magical powers really think they do, and what proportion are straight up frauds?I still find it odd and perplexing that in the 21st century some people assign a third category: those who claim to have magic powers, and who really do.

  8. Well, maybe she went to visit the Cafe vault the previous week – entry free – and saw Lennon’s jacket there, a prized possession, hanging in a case. Then when she runs her hands all over it in this clip, she quickly figures out which of the exhibits it is.Seriously. I hate Sally as well, for being just another “psychic” who claims to have mystic powers…Yeah, go live a fairy tale, Morgan!I agree though, she has to be a good actress, being astonished by her own fraud.Good post.

  9. Is this what UK TV become? Why does TV have 101 shows about ghost hunters, psychics and other frauds – and close to zero ‘critical thinking’/sceptic shows about similar subjects?I know which would be of more value… but I guess people just want to fool themselves.Good postLee

  10. at a local show featuring the self promoting sally morgan over 45 people walked out at the interval

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *