I am naturally skeptical of Erin's claims

[SheldonCooper]

Originally Posted by AlmostGodess

Flying would have never been possible if people continued to prove that flying is impossible.

Actually, it would have never been made possible if people kept claiming it was possible without trying to prove it.

[Lionman]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

Actually, it would have never been made possible if people kept claiming it was possible without trying to prove it.

You might be mssing the point here. They were driven to show it was possible, to themselves as much as to others. Those who believed it was impossible never tried.

People with psychic abilities prove their ability to themselves and to many others time and time again. They don't just say "psychic abilities are possible" and leave it there, never trying anything out themselves.

[SheldonCooper]

No, really, the burden of proof is with those that make the claim. Nobody is making any effort to show it is impossible. As long as nobody provides any proof, it is assumed not possible.

"Proving to yourself" and to few people is not a real proof. Because the mind is weak and prone to self-suggestion. And because many of the people that believe in psychics are pretty gullible or also victims of self-suggestion. Mental illness is an issue as well. I am not saying all psychics are wrong but what I know is that a non-psychic can easily fall into believing she is a psychic and can even manage to deceive other people , so just proving to yourself and to few other people is not enough. If fakes can do what you suggest as a proof then it is simply not enough.

Reminds me to "90% correct attempts". 90% is a pretty low number. I think it is possible to statistically guess a person's sign with such low of a success rate without there existing paranormal stuff. Cold reading works just like that.


The last thing in the universe we should trust is our own mind.

[AlmostGodess]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

Nobody is making any effort to show it is impossible.

To my mind, proving that certain things or theories are impossible is one of our favorite human activities. It would take too much to go into science-related examples, but, when I look at this forum, I see many people trying to prove it is impossible to become vegan, it is impossible to get over a breakup, it is impossible to apply the LoA etc.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

The last thing in the universe we should trust is our own mind.

Thank you for my first laugh out loud of the day!

[Gene]

Originally Posted by James81

That's highway robbery. It's milk and coffee beans and foam. Come on! $4.25???? Really? Really?

Prove to me that that latte is worth $4.25! Why should I drink a latte that costs $4.25?

Ok...you gotta admit...a tall, vanilla latte is better than sex. So, I guess I'm not paying for the actual ingredients and labor involved as I am paying for the experience and how that experience nourishes me and makes me feel. In that case, $4.25 is an absolute steal!

No! No, say it's not so! Drinks are not better than sex!

[Lionman]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

...

Yeah to be honest I'm not sure why there's not any solid mainstream proof of these things yet. I'm a rational guy, and I have enough subjective experience with this stuff for me to see it as real, so I don't really need there to be any proof to appease the scientists out there. There may be a reason for this, as mainstream proof of such things would negate mass individual choice to get involved in such a belief system. But I'm sure that just sounds like mumbo jumbo to you anyway.

Anyhow, you may be interested in a study conducted by Michael Gauquelin, who was a french mathematician. The result was a statistically significant correlation between the position of Mars in a horoscope and the eminence of an athlete.

[desertrat]

Syndicate , my point is do the work it takes to get the answers for your self. I think you will have a better understanding of the answers that way . desert rat

[Ambrose Pierce]

Well, consider this carefully.

IF the law of attraction is a law of the universe, it is absurd to go to a psychic. A psychic could only tell you:

A) your future. in which case, if you accepted the validity of that prediction, you'd go ahead and create it. However, if you changed your thoughts and emotions in some other manner, according to LOA, you'd have a different future from the one predicted. So accepting both LOA and the utility of outside psychic prediction for the future is a contradictory and self-defeating stance. Essentially you'd be paying someone to tell you to create one possible future for you by implantation.

or

B) The psychic could tell you what forces impinge on you at present. These could include past life incidences, some kind of energy blockage, or the interference of non-material entities. However, again, if one accepts LOA, these phenomena listed are simply the product of one's thoughts and feelings, and granting them the objective status that would be necessitated by accepting a psychic's pronouncement regarding them would only create more of them.

I haven't even touched upon the obvious difficulties in squaring Subjective Reality with non-material entities that the non-psychic is completely unaware of yet are supposed to be impacting their life.

It is contradictory to promote a subjectivist and LOA view of reality while granting enough objectivity to psychic phenomena to suppose someone outside of you has a privileged perspective over and beyond what you do.

[desertrat]

Ambros Pierce , welcome to the forum. So you are saying we should all learn creative visualization/l.o.a. so we can have every thing we want ? desert rat

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

No, really, the burden of proof is with those that make the claim. Nobody is making any effort to show it is impossible. As long as nobody provides any proof, it is assumed not possible.

"Proving to yourself" and to few people is not a real proof. Because the mind is weak and prone to self-suggestion. And because many of the people that believe in psychics are pretty gullible or also victims of self-suggestion. Mental illness is an issue as well. I am not saying all psychics are wrong but what I know is that a non-psychic can easily fall into believing she is a psychic and can even manage to deceive other people , so just proving to yourself and to few other people is not enough. If fakes can do what you suggest as a proof then it is simply not enough.

Reminds me to "90% correct attempts". 90% is a pretty low number. I think it is possible to statistically guess a person's sign with such low of a success rate without there existing paranormal stuff. Cold reading works just like that.


The last thing in the universe we should trust is our own mind.

To be honest, I also agree that the burden of proof is with those who are making the extraordinary claim. By extraordinary claim, I suppose I'm referring to something that most people don't believe they have access to, regardless of how ordinary you may think it is. It's just my personal opinion though and I know that some will disagree. However, I'm not exactly sure how this view of mine makes me 'uneducated' on the subject. I know I have a lot to learn in this area, but I have already learned over time that this is a huge industry we are talking about here, where so many horrible people do benefit off others who may be in a state of desperation.

Why is it so important to try to validate the authenticity of psychic mediums or at least try to understand how they come to their conclusions? Well, consider this example:

Say my father passed away while I was in my early 20s and he was always someone I looked up to but I never felt that I could make him proud of me. Maybe he ran a large business and I didn't really know what I wanted out of life yet. After his demise, I seek out the attention of a psychic in my area and I tell them about how I felt I never lived up to my father's expectations, how I always looked up to him, how I didn't know where to go from here, and so on and so forth. If that psychic were not legit and didn't have any real ability to communicate with my father, and I was searching for answers out of desperation, they could make up anything they wanted to and their words could potentially shape the rest of my life for better or for worse.

Is it really fair to have that kind of power over somebody while they are in the state they are in IF you aren't actually doing what you say you can do?

I suppose the questions I ask myself from time to time are: How do we begin to separate those whose intentions are good from those who are only interested in running a business? Is it okay if a legit psychic doesn't feel the need show the world that they do indeed have abilities that go beyond what most of the world's population believe they have? Two ways that I believe a psychic could validate their abilities are below:

1. A legit psychic could spend an extensive amount of time using their abilities not for personal gain but, instead, helping with unsolved mysteries. Yes, psychics also have to make a living, but can you imagine the amount of business that you would be able to generate if you could could build an amazing track record by solving tens, hundreds, or even thousands of unsolved mysteries, especially ones involving little children? If you can talked to my loved ones who have passed, what would be the problem in finding out crucial details about the murders of loved ones who have passed? If I found out one day that I had Spider-Man's powers, would it be okay for me to go work at a a Pet Store for the rest of my life?

2. Another solution would be to take up something like the James Randi Educational Foundation's "One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge", which you can search for on the internet. If you read the challenge details, the procedure is very reasonable. James Randi is not a skeptic who denies that psychic phenomenon exists- his standpoint is "show us". How wonderful would it be to open a skeptic's mind and be able to give 1M dollars to the charity of your choice?

I've thought more and more about the idea of offering a no hassle, 100% refund, and it doesn't sound good to me anymore, simply because a grieving person could come to a psychic who is actually fake and not even know that they are being lied to about what their loved one wants to communicate to them.

I enjoy continuing to learn more about psychics, the paranormal and, specifically, talking to the dead. Thanks to everybody who is being respectful towards me and offering good insight. I am learning a lot as I go along.

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by Mynder

In my opinion, he was only trying to empathize, not offend, or be childish.

Why did you feel the need to respond with derision?

LOL!

Wow.. I totally thought the dude was calling me a 'desert rat' when, really, it was just his username...

DOH!

[rickrock]

Originally Posted by Syndicate

LOL!

Wow.. I totally thought the dude was calling me a 'desert rat' when, really, it was just his username...

DOH!

LMAO! wow, that would be a random and strange insult.

[AjaTrinidad]

My two cents to the OP: If you're genuinely interested in more information about the validity of psychics or the psychic world in general, do research on your own, and simply trust your instincts. Don't ask anyone to enforce what it is that you feel. Avid psychic believers are biased and can't give you an objective answer because they believe, and avid non-psychic believers are biased and can't give you an objective answer because they don't. If you are interested in Erin in particular out of natural curiosity, I suggest you just research the psychic field itself. After you've done that you'll have a good feeling of who is right for you.

I see a lot of times here, people who are of the belief that they're highly knowledgeable about things, unnecessarily throw snarky responses out to people who are genuinely seeking information. Don't feel the need to defend yourself to things like that. If you already stated that you mean no harm, and are simply curious, let it go. You've already said it. You have no control over whether or not people will believe you. You don't have to go back and forth about it.

Anyway, again, I'd suggest doing some further research on psychics on your own since you're curious, and take in all of the information you receive with an open mind. You'll then find the right answer for yourself. Don't ask anyone to prove or disprove it for you, because all that happens is 7 pages of a thread that could've ended 6 pages ago.

Just trust yourself.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by SheldonCooper

No, really, the burden of proof is with those that make the claim.

Originally Posted by Syndicate

You hit the nail on the head.

Syndicate, I think you are being a bit dense, communications-wise -- in the sense that something important is not getting through your thick skull. That is, if you really are sincere and open about your curiosity, and you really would like for Erin to answer your questions and/or give you proof about what she does.

I'm just not convinced that's so, because you're not getting the results you want if it is so -- and you keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results, despite having gotten a tremendous amount of feedback, in a variety of different forms, about why that is.

If you truly are sincere and curious about learning more about what Erin does, you might want to try something else. (specifically, something other than asserting that she bears the burden of proving something to you. You can believe that all you want, and it doesn't make a lick of difference -- except possibly to have her less inclined to engage with you.)

[Melchior]

After all this discussion, it doesn't seem like we're getting anywhere. We have the "would be convinced people if provided sufficient evidence" not receiving any "evidence" and the "convinced people with the evidence" not providing any "evidence" but instead telling the former to find their own "evidence", experientially, I might add. I do find it odd that the "convinced" side so quickly label the "unconvinced" side as close-minded skeptics though, almost as if they were close-minded themselves about their own beliefs, almost as though telling the "unconvinced" side to shoo. I doubt that this is actually the case, but this may have been the impression that was given in spite of that.

I wonder though, if psychic ability is somewhat hereditary, this way of handling things may be unfair to the "blind". Just like we can't exactly "see" subatomic particles with our eyes, we rely on scientific instruments to track them (btw, here's a link if you'd like to learn more. ). Similarly, I'm certain that these things we attribute to psychic phenomena also leave "tracks" that can be detected in other ways, aside from just the consciousness of the person using them, we just have to be clever. It's like one of Steve's old articles or podcasts (can't quite remember which) where he talks about his color blindness and how just left to his own devices he wouldn't be able to tell different colors apart, but taking a picture and using and looking at the RGB value on the computer, it's apparent that the two colors are different. So as for getting a clever readout of a person's psychic ability, we may have to wait a while longer. Here's an old thread that discussed this.

Perhaps, the answer to the "unconvinced" currently would simply be this: there's not really a good way of proving to you that these things labeled "psychic" are real in the sense that they exist, but there is good enough reason to believe that it does, although perhaps in ways that neither of us would have initially imagined given our current methods of understanding them. However, these things labeled' "psychic" seem to work within reason for all practical purposes and will continue to do so regardless of what anybody really says about it so until we find those clever ways (or at least, clever ways that would be satisfactory to you) of showing what may otherwise be unknown, we may simply be at a standstill. If you'd just want to believe this, then just do that, but if you can't bring yourself to believe it until sufficient evidence comes along, then you'll probably just have to withhold your conclusions until you come across that evidence. I'm sorry I can't help you more than that, unfortunately.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Syndicate

Is it really fair to have that kind of power over somebody while they are in the state they are in IF you aren't actually doing what you say you can do?

Yes. One can only have "that kind of power over somebody" if that somebody hands over power-over them. Even in a vulnerable state.

Which is not to say that it's not also fair to expose people who are exploiting people, or to help others become alert and aware to patterns of exploitation. What's dense behavior, in my opinion, is coming into what is effectively someone's home and saying, "hey, you! you owe me proof that you're not exploiting people! I'm not saying you're a fake, don't get me wrong, but it's your burden to prove you're not! What do you mean, I'm being rude?!"

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by Syndicate
Is it really fair to have that kind of power over somebody while they are in the state they are in IF you aren't actually doing what you say you can do?

Originally Posted by Angela

Yes. One can only have "that kind of power over somebody" if that somebody hands over power-over them. Even in a vulnerable state.

Give me a break.

So if I meet up with a mentally disabled person and convince them that "cool people" run across the street to try to avoid cars, as if it's some kind of fun game, it's alright if he ends up getting injured because the son of a gun handed his power to me?

In the same way, it would not be okay for a non-legit psychic to give false information to a person who is not of the right mind because it could do a different kind of psychological damage that could influence the way they live the rest of their life.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Syndicate

Give me a break.

So if I meet up with a mentally disabled person and convince him that "cool people" run across the street to try to avoid cars, as if it's some kind of fun game, it's alright if he ends up getting seriously injured because the son of a gun handed his power to me?

If you were choosing to intervene in someone's life with the intention of harming him, by, for example, exploiting a mental weakness, yes, that is alright with me. And it's alright with me for me (or anyone) to take action to prevent him from being harmed.

But that's not a parallel of what's happening here. Erin offers a service to mentally able people -- people who feel they can afford her fee, people who are able to feel they may benefit from such a service. She's making herself available to provide a service to people who choose to take advantage of it, not walking up to people on the street and intervening in their lives.

As I said, I also think it's fair for someone who feels there's harmful exploitation taking place to step in mitigate, as you or I would in your example above. That's not what you're doing, though; at least not what you've said you're doing. You've said you're just being open and curious and wanting to learn more, not protecting people from potential harm. If you're protecting people from the potential harm that you have already said you feel defensive about, then you're not truly being open and curious and wanting to learn more.

Are you saying that Erin's readers are mentally disabled or not in their right minds, and that it's up to you to protect them, just in case she's a fake?

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by Angela

But that's not a parallel of what's happening here. Erin offers a service to mentally able people -- people who feel they can afford her fee, people who are able to feel they may benefit from such a service. She's making herself available to provide a service to people who choose to take advantage of it, not walking up to people on the street and intervening in their lives.

Originally Posted by Angela

Are you saying that Erin's readers are mentally disabled or not in their right minds, and that it's up to you to protect them, just in case she's a fake?

My comment was directed towards psychics who are indefinitely faking their abilities, and not towards Erin.

Any psychic who offers a service will have 'x' clients who are of completely sound mind who know exactly what they are getting into. In the very same way, they will have 'x' clients who seek psychic services while they are not of sound mind, during a period where they cannot rationalize and think with a clear mind like a normal person. This is a fact, not simply speculation.

After experiencing a 7 year relationship ending that began while I was in my late teens, I, like I'm sure many here, understand what it can feel like when all rationality goes out the window and your emotions take complete control as part of the grieving process. I can only imagine the emotional intensity one would experience in this sort of situation if it were the death of someone very close, and how greatly it would magnify with the promise of being able to communicate with that loved one.

In my opinion, what a psychic claims they can do has to be legitimate. If it isn't, then they are wasting the money of their clients who are of sound mind and are genuinely interested in exploring this field. Why? Simply because they are not offering what is advertised. They would be offering 'fake comfort'. Likewise, if they are not doing what they are actually saying they are doing, they are preying on somebody who may be grieving, and they are doing it for financial gain, which I and I'm sure many would find disgusting.

Originally Posted by Angela

As I said, I also think it's fair for someone who feels there's harmful exploitation taking place to step in mitigate, as you or I would in your example above. That's not what you're doing, though; at least not what you've said you're doing. You've said you're just being open and curious and wanting to learn more, not protecting people from potential harm. If you're protecting people from the potential harm that you have already said you feel defensive about, then you're not truly being open and curious and wanting to learn more.

I am very curious in this type of phenomenon but I am also interested in the methods that are used. In a way I am defensive, particularly because of my bias from past experiences with psychics, but I am searching for truth.

I come with what I consider to be very valid questions. Why don't psychics spend a large part of their time dealing with unsolved mysteries? Is it because they are only sort of psychic? Why is there not enough incentive for psychics in general to prove the abilities they have discovered to the rest of the world, rather than just their clients? From there they could prove to everybody that they possess the same ability, right?

I am trying to learn the answers to these questions. Telling me to read a book on the subject wouldn't be helpful because there are thousands of books on this subject.

Maybe somebody could recommend some good books to me rather than suggesting that I should just take the initiative to go to the book store with my wallet in hand and go wild. It would be appreciated.

[Angela]

As I've mentioned, I don't believe in "supernatural" or psi phenomena, except as metaphors, either. And I can totally understand the intention to unconceal insidious exploiters of those who use manipulation to squeeze money out of unsuspecting and vulnerable people. I've done it! (You should see some of the discussions we've had around here about the Randi million dollar test. Ai chihuahua.)

I'm not intending to give you a hard time for doing that, or for being skeptical, or for wanting to protect mentally disabled people, or whatever.

I'm saying that for your stated aim -- proof that what Erin says she does is legitimate -- it's not an intelligent move to come to ERIN'S FORUM and announce that she bears the burden of providing you with that proof, and that, while you wouldn't say she's a fake, you're interested in proof that she's NOT a fake. I would say that, rather than being an intelligent way to achieve the stated aim, it's quite inept, and rather likely to NOT get you the stated aim.

If you show up at someone's house and announce, "I am naturally skeptical about your claims; you bear the burden of proving they're true," why would you be surprised or affronted when they say, "So what?" Especially if you're the umpteenth person who has interrupted Top Chef to tell them you don't trust them and they should prove to you why they should.

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by Angela

I'm saying that for your stated aim -- proof that what Erin says she does is legitimate -- it's not an intelligent move to come to ERIN'S FORUM and announce that she bears the burden of providing you with that proof, and that, while you wouldn't say she's a fake, you're interested in proof that she's NOT a fake. I would say that, rather than being an intelligent way to achieve the stated aim, it's quite inept, and rather likely to NOT get you the stated aim.

Perhaps it was a pretty bold and risky discussion for me to start, but I felt like it had to be done. Something inside of me made me feel the need to do it.

I have gained a lot from Steve Pavlina's work. I could read his conclusions, rationalize what he was saying, and then put it to use. I have received tremendous value from this.

I sort of hit a brick wall when I first heard about Erin's work, not because it was off putting or because it offended me, but mainly because I kept asking myself how she has come to her conclusions. How do you know demons exist? How do you know possession is real? How can you claim that you are indeed talking to people who have passed? The "how" is the most important thing to me and I use it with respect for both Steve and Erin- I know they are probably wonderful people. I wonder how people come to their conclusions. Where do people draw the line between opinion and fact? Can a psychic claim with 100% that they are communicating with a person's dead loved one? How? Anybody who becomes overly defensive to these questions I raise are, in my opinion, perhaps not as confident in what they believe in as they would like to be.

Having said that, this discussion, for me at least, has shifted away from Erin a bit and more towards psychics in general. If I could change the thread title now, I would. I still have a number of questions that I am searching for answers for, but I might get there eventually. I am hoping for something meaningful to come out of this conversation.

[Melchior]

Syndicate, do you have a scientific background by chance? That is, would you be willing to put forth the effort into designing some easily reproducible experiments that may lead someone to lean one way or the other as opposed to remaining uncertain either way? (i.e. coming up with those clever ways I mentioned earlier )

[daj]

I would love to see more psychics work to solve different missing person cases. There are thousands of missing person cases out there psychics could help solve, right?

[Syndicate]

Originally Posted by daj

I would love to see more psychics work to solve different missing person cases. There are thousands of missing person cases out there psychics could help solve, right?

You would think so.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Syndicate

.... I kept asking myself how she has come to her conclusions. How do you know demons exist? How do you know possession is real? How can you claim that you are indeed talking to people who have passed? The "how" is the most important thing to me and I use it with respect for both Steve and Erin- I know they are probably wonderful people. I wonder how people come to their conclusions. Where do people draw the line between opinion and fact? Can a psychic claim with 100% that they are communicating with a person's dead loved one? How? Anybody who becomes overly defensive to these questions I raise are, in my opinion, perhaps not as confident in what they believe in as they would like to be.

I've wondered those questions myself, and I understand the desire to understand someone's answers to them. I think it's a wonderful thing to ask for more information, to seek to understand someone's point of view, including when their point of view is confronting to you.

And I also think you have got another intention running here, one that has you not just seeking to understand, but also to .... do something else. That 'something else' is working at odds to the fulfillment of your conscious desire. It has you closed, I think, to hearing answers that would fulfill you if you could hear them. For instance, Steve's first responses to you were an invitation to you to shift your perspective, and you declined (I think that's because you were feeling the defensiveness you said you felt in your OP). For you to really *get* what Erin is doing at any level, I think, is going to take not just intellectual understanding, not just reading books or hearing testimonials or nay-sayers, but a perspective shift, at least temporarily -- you could have your old perspective back when you're through.

I think that, because I've been there, and I recognize myself in you -- I recognize the desire for fairness and justice, along with the desire for the answers to your questions.

The perspective that you've been using has you occurring in a way that is not likely to have Erin or Steve assist you further in that shift. But that doesn't mean you can't still shift, if you be at cause in the matter.

And once again, a shift in perspective doesn't doom you to that perspective -- you can always move to another, if the one you're using doesn't work well for you.

I'll leave it at that -- for you to cause a shift for yourself, or not, as you choose. Best wishes in your quest!

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by Syndicate

LOL!

Wow.. I totally thought the dude was calling me a 'desert rat' when, really, it was just his username...

DOH!

Yeah, that guy makes the effort to spell correctly sometimes, but most of the time it's anyones guess what he is saying, so I can see how it might have been misconstrued.

[elucidate]

This is very neutral advice.

You've basically called on the soldiers here, of people who believe, who feel they need to defend Erin, even though you didn't actually attack her.

You're best bet is to try this stuff out for yourself, and then you will be in a better position to make a rounded oppinion about it.

You don't have to believe anything...but coming to a proffessional psychics personal thread and asking for this is probably not the best course of action if you want to find out more about her services or genuine psychics in general.

Originally Posted by AjaTrinidad

My two cents to the OP: If you're genuinely interested in more information about the validity of psychics or the psychic world in general, do research on your own, and simply trust your instincts. Don't ask anyone to enforce what it is that you feel. Avid psychic believers are biased and can't give you an objective answer because they believe, and avid non-psychic believers are biased and can't give you an objective answer because they don't. If you are interested in Erin in particular out of natural curiosity, I suggest you just research the psychic field itself. After you've done that you'll have a good feeling of who is right for you.

I see a lot of times here, people who are of the belief that they're highly knowledgeable about things, unnecessarily throw snarky responses out to people who are genuinely seeking information. Don't feel the need to defend yourself to things like that. If you already stated that you mean no harm, and are simply curious, let it go. You've already said it. You have no control over whether or not people will believe you. You don't have to go back and forth about it.

Anyway, again, I'd suggest doing some further research on psychics on your own since you're curious, and take in all of the information you receive with an open mind. You'll then find the right answer for yourself. Don't ask anyone to prove or disprove it for you, because all that happens is 7 pages of a thread that could've ended 6 pages ago.

Just trust yourself.

[desertrat]

Desert rat is a nic I use here , some other forums , and a few chat rooms. The desert rat is a tough little critter that makes its home in the desert . Some others from the south western USA use the nic. also. AZ , CA The name is not an insult. Yea I am a terible speller , I bought and try to use a dictionary. desert rat

[Mounds]

Not to stir the pot but I'm naturally skeptical of these things myself. I've kinda sat on the fence for most of this thread (think I had one post earlier).
That's not to say that I'm going to jump on Erin's couch and start wiping off my shoes. I really enjoy her writing and have gotten some good insights from her stuff. I imagine in real life she's a very nice lady!
I checked out her price and I actually think it's irrelevant. There's a big difference between price and value. Some people are cheap, plain and simple. I have friends who won't spend $10 on a book that could save them $10,000.
The reason that I'm skeptical of these kinds of things is that I've never actually experienced anything like this myself. Same goes for pretty much anything paranormal, magical or anything like cryptozoology. For a few years, I was into it big time. Nothing ever came my way.
Lets throw all that skepticism out the window for a minute and have a black and white look at this. Reading the testimonials, this looks like a life changing experience. These people come out happy and they feel changed. Is that worth, say, $800? I say HELL YA. What's your happiness worth? How about clarity in your life? $800 is a small fee.
On the other side of the coin, if you spend that kind of cash, your psychologically geared to get your money's worth. If Erin tells you how to get your stuff together, your going to be much more inclined to do it.
So it's actually a win-win situation. Either Erin is psychic or she's an excellent coach. Regardless, people's lives are changing for the better based on the work she does. So really, debating whether her claims are true or false is debating minutae. All roads lead to Rome.
So ya. I'm still a skeptic of paranormal stuff but I can't deny the results of Erin's practice. Even that may change with time. There was a time when I was skeptical of the idea that a $10 book could save me thousands of dollars. One thing I'm not skeptical about is the value of one of those readings. I'm sure it's worth a whole lot more than the price tag.

-Tim