Like it? Share it!

Banner


Reason Rally Logo
 

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



A Chance Encounter PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by Jeff Wagg   
Wednesday, 23 September 2009 00:00

I was recently at a gathering of skeptics. There were about 3 dozen people there, some of whom I knew, but many more who were strangers to me. One of these stood out a bit, and when I first noticed him, I knew he was going to want to speak with me.

He was soft-spoken, friendly, and over-dressed for the occasion. After patiently waiting for me to finish a conversation, he introduced himself.

"Hello, I'm Dave. I'm clairvoyant."

He went on to explain to me that he could predict the future, and had done so over 200 times. He claimed that it was only a matter of time before his abilities were recognized.

As this was social time, I engaged him a bit more than I would in a professional capacity. I asked him if he could predict next week's lottery. He laughed, saying, "You just don't understand how this works. I can predict events surrounded by trauma best." And after a pause, he added,  "I can easily predict baseball game scores, however."

Aha, a perfectly testable claim for the JREF $1,000,000 Challenge. So I asked him to apply, and started talking about the things he would need to gather. He stopped me mid-sentence: "I did apply. I was rejected."

Alison Smith handles all challenge claims these days, so I'm no longer familiar with the names of everyone who applies. I told Dave I'd have to check the files to see why he was rejected. But he knew why he was rejected: he couldn't meet the requirements of media presence and academic support.

Now consider this: a man claims he can predict baseball scores and yet can't find a reporter or even a blogger who will write about him, nor can he find anyone attached to a university to observe his ability. How can this be? Dave explained that it was very difficult for him to find people who would take him seriously, and that meeting these requirements wasn't as easy as I was suggesting.

This puzzles me. Rosemary Hunter, who claimed she could have God fill my bladder with urine (spontaneously) and then induce instant incontinence, was able to find a reporter to verify her story. Failed challenge claimant Connie Sonne had oodles of press coverage for her abilities as a psychic. And yet Dave, who is doing something that millions of gamblers hope to be able to do every week, can't find anyone.

What am I to make of this? Surely he must have tested this ability, right? Surely he must have written down "The Red Sox will win game 2 of the World Series 5-2", watched the game and verified his ability, right?

Actually, wrong.

My belief is that he hasn't done that at all. If he gave a prediction to any reporter and was correct, they WOULD pay attention. They'd have to—the enterprise of gambling exists only because abilities like this don't. Strong evidence that someone could predict the outcome of baseball games would change everything.

So, my conclusion is that he hasn't tested himself. He's confident he can do it; he believes he can do it - but Occam's Razor says he simply couldn't have tested it.

And this is why we ask challenge applicants to be sure that they've tested their ability thoroughly before applying. Too many don't test themselves because they so enjoy the feeling of being special, and don't want to ruin that feeling with incontrovertible evidence that they don't. If they wait until the challenge to test themselves, they can point to the JREF as a scapegoat, as Connie Sonne did.

Dave is able to apply again in May. I urge him to do so, but only after he tests himself. If he can really predict baseball game scores, I'd love to have a few choice numbers before the actual challenge takes place. I'm in Vegas often and could use the extra cash before the entire city shuts down and gambling becomes a thing of the past.

Trackback(0)
Comments (45)Add Comment
Psychics
written by dougreardon, September 23, 2009
I have never understood how people could believe that psychics and Las Vegas can both exist in the same world.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +78
@dougreardon
written by CasaRojo, September 23, 2009
'cause "it doesn't work like that". I think that they simply need to leave off the last two words of that sentence.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +31
Social Skepticism
written by Sadhatter, September 23, 2009
Strangely enough i encountered a friend from high school ( going on 7 years removed from the institution currently ) who produced a series of ghost hunting videos recently. And while i have written a few blogs to the nature of how they were bunk, i find it hard to , in person be confrontational about the issue. From the vibe of the article it seems you were in a similar situation.

And on a side note, it's pretty easy to track an ip address nowadays regardless of precautions taken by the user. Once captain cutNpaste steps beyond lunacy and gets into threats i am sure the local authorities would like to know. Not that i think it is anything beyond too much time and too little maturity, but better safe than sorry.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by outsorcerer, September 23, 2009
How does anyone expect people to take them seriously, and given DaveMabus/douglaskellner's tripe I had to snicker as I typed that, when they can't even bother to correct their typos and spell the word "the" correctly in their header...?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by MadScientist, September 23, 2009
@Herc: You must have missed Phil Plait's post about the JREF MDC continuing after all. I'd love to know why the change - I'm sure JREF can put the $1M to good use; most people are confident that supernatural powers do not exist and so the prize will never be claimed anyway.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
...
written by Bruno, September 23, 2009
Remarkable to see that, of all people, Herc was unaware of the prize continuing. I mean, he should've known before any of us did.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +25
...
written by kenhamer, September 23, 2009
Actually, predicting baseball scores is remarkably easy.

Do so accurately is a whole different ball game.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +18
@kenhammer
written by outsorcerer, September 24, 2009
While I realize what you mean, Vegas oddsmakers have been predicting them closely enough (using statistical models, not woo) to be able to take sucker's money for years...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
...
written by Squid, September 24, 2009
@Sadhatter - Actually, David has already gone past posting to making death threats. It was about 5 days ago or so. My concern is that no one will take him seriously and he'll eventually escalate his threats to attacking people.

Squid
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
Oddsmaking
written by Dr.Sid, September 24, 2009
Oddsmaking is not about the game .. it's about how people will bet. Game itself is irrelevant. The odds must be made so if team A wins, people who bet on team B will pay the loss, and vice versa. This is ensured mainly by moving the odds based on how people bet. The guess is used only to avoid large bet changes .. but again, guess about bets, not about the game.

As for the guy .. it's typical. People can believe in such things only if they don't test themselves, or they don't do the tests properly (ignoring false results is common problem). Poor guy.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
...
written by OldProf, September 24, 2009
Dave - I thought that he said his name was Clairvoyant (a little unusual)?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Gr8wight, September 24, 2009
Yeah, Jeff, you missed the boat there. You should have simply said, "nice to meet you, Clairvoyant, my name is Jeff."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
dougreardon
written by Alan3354, September 24, 2009
votes +33 !!!

I've never seen a number that big. I knew it was going to happen, tho.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
@Alan3354
written by CasaRojo, September 24, 2009
"votes +33 !!!

I've never seen a number that big."

Just FYI, Alan. There's lots bigger numbers. smilies/grin.gif smilies/cool.gif smilies/wink.gif smilies/tongue.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
casarojo
written by Alan3354, September 24, 2009
Is there no limit?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Psychic Knowledge and Identity
written by StarTrekLivz, September 24, 2009
If these people are psychics, why do they always have to ask for your name?

Not to mention credit card information (for phone psychics, for example).
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@Alan3354
written by Kuroyume, September 24, 2009
You'll have to talk to Herc as he seems to think there is... smilies/wink.gif

On topic, yes, typical confirmation bias employed by people that convinces them, in their own minds, that they have precognitive abilities. Make lots of guesses, ignore the misses, tout the supposed, close, constantly updated hits as you see them, subjectively. These people tend to be ignorant of the subtle clues that we can pick up almost unconsciously or the ubiquity of their oft vague statements. See dowsers, psychics, clairvoyants, etc.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
Skeptics - one, clairvoyants - nowhere
written by rosie, September 24, 2009
Jeff, you said
when I first noticed him, I knew he was going to want to speak with me
It would appear that you are 100% more clairvoyant than he is.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +8
...
written by Xiphos, September 24, 2009
At least that Dave was well mannered and dressed appropriately and doesn't want to commit mayhem upon your person. Unlike certain unstable posters that share the same name as then fellow in the post.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@ Squid
written by Sadhatter, September 24, 2009
You know personally i think that he is just some internet fool. But he is a fool that is not just being ( and i use the word as loosely as any word has ever been used before.) "funny" ( in only his own eyes obviously) by trying to be a silly troll sounding outraged. He is actually making threats, attempting not to just annoy , but to cause fear in another person. Which is simply not legal.

Whatever his motivation , the fact is a death threat is a death threat, and the man can be held responsible regardless of the medium he chooses to make it with.

But i don't think we have anything to worry about, the clairvoyant Jeff was talking to sees things that revolve around trauma , and he didn't mention anything about him being killed.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
dougreardon
written by Stanfr, September 24, 2009
I thought Vegas existed because of people who believe in woo, in fact it thrives on woo-dom!. I mean, what logical person would throw there money away for one-in-a-million odds when they could invest it and be virtually assured of increasing their worth? I assume you mean that a psychic would put Vegas out of business, but that is clearly an incorrect assumption: Casinos have a long proven record of sending 'winners with an edge' packing!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@Stanfr
written by kdv, September 24, 2009
I assume you mean that a psychic would put Vegas out of business, but that is clearly an incorrect assumption: Casinos have a long proven record of sending 'winners with an edge' packing!


I can't agree. You forget that psychics are all such honest, ethical people that they wouldn't dream of using their powers to take money from multi-billion dollar casinos. smilies/cheesy.gif ( Of course, there is no such prohibition on taking $20 of an old lady's pension money to tell her she will have great good fortune in a month .. or two ... or three ... or sometime.)

However, if rogues exist, you're right, "a" psychic couldn't put the casinos out of business. The moment s/he started consistently beating the odds, they would find some excuse to ban him/her. But one thing the True Believers and I agree on is that the number of true psychics in the world is not one. I believe it is zero. Depending on to whom you speak, they believe the true number is thousands, millions, or everybody but we just don't know it. And once you have many people beating the odds, the casino dies. How do they pick the psychics to ban? Most psychics explain their failures by claiming they aren't 100% accurate ( again I find myself agreeing ). How does the casino separate the psychics from the non-psychic winners, some of whom MUST exist according to the rules of probability (and it is not one in a million!) If they try to ban all winners, then all the losers will desert them too, because who is going to gamble if they don't believe there is a small chance they might beat the odds and win, at least in the short term?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Tebtenri, September 24, 2009
Surely though to claim he could predict baseball scores, he must have given some examples, as he apparently went out of his way to make himself known?

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Herc, September 25, 2009
The challenge rules haven't been updated.

Jeff Wagg and Phil Plait and James Randi have no clue to even assess if something is a rare occurance,
they only handle YES or NO. Obviously they have to say no so it must be a pattern I'm seeing in noise.

I found out bibliomancy is the term for getting answers from random pages of books.
So I added my video of bibliomancy to wikipedia, check out the captcha!


report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -10
Thats it!!
written by RobbieD, September 25, 2009
I had to dig around, but finally got to the 'greatest magic show on Earth'. There is a video of Herc asking questions and picking phrases at random from a book. The phrases picked from the book appear to have no relation to the questions asked, though Herc seems to think there is. One of the picked phrases has a word (fox) in common with the question and this is taken as significant. I must admit Herc does seem quite good natured about the whole thing, but this is no proof of physic powers.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@RobbieD
written by TDjazz, September 25, 2009
I had to dig around, but finally got to the 'greatest magic show on Earth'.


Herc's URL doesn't go anywhere (and it isn't on the wikipedia "Bibliomancy" page). Can you post a link to what you found?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Brookston John, September 25, 2009
I think I went to school with Claire Voyant. She got married to some basketball player.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 25, 2009
www.GreatestMagicShowOnEarth.com

Actually I got 2 1/2 direct answers.
How do you know you are Adam -> I dunno
Why are the government torturing you -> I'm a witch
Will Woollman ever pay back Susan Boyle -> He never calls the place

The 2 JREF questions had very opinionated answers, I win while they weep, and to qualify I make them stop.
Whether Megan Fox gets an Oscar I 'announced' the name Fox.
I got a related answer to when I die, a description of how I die.

Anyone going to do Randi's favorite debunking method and post a video with even better answers?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -7
Herc, come on.
written by Sadhatter, September 25, 2009
A much easier way of debunking it is simply how many other things these vague phrases could mean.

Anyone could do this, no matter what the phrases are they can be attributed as an answer. This is not a power, this is not even a party trick, this is Reading Random Phrases and then saying " i win".

As well the ease of being able to cheat is only second to stealing candy from infants. there is no debunking needed, because there is no paranormal claim, your saying you can read something and find a way to make it kind of fit a question you ask. If yours is a paranormal power, then my ability to defy gravity for very limited amounts of time using only muscles in my leg surely qualifies as well.

And as a final thought, if you want to gain knowledge from books, a better way would be to pick a book on the subject you want answers to and read the entire thing.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by Herc, September 25, 2009
Be my guest pick any vague phrase you like and compare it to the answers.

I will use "this has been a very big problem in the past"

Tally how many times my answer was more in context than the control phrase.


Can I win the million dollar paranormal prize?
"... with the background of wailing vendors"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"




When will Herc die?
"... with a cheap little gun"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"



How do you know that you are Adam?
"... I dunno"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"



What can Adam do that would qualify for the JREF million dollar prize?
"Make them stop"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"



Why are you being tortured by the government?
"... I'm a witch"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"



Will Megan Fox win the Oscar for best actress in 2010?
"...in Tokyo Fox and I had adjoining suites"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"



Will Edmond Wollman ever pay back Susan Boyle?
"..He never calls the place"
"this has been a very big problem in the past"


7 out of 7. I defeated 1 in 128 odds. (Just with a simple 2 option analysis).
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -6
Proved yourself wrong.
written by Sadhatter, September 26, 2009
In each of the questions the control phrase is just as applicable as yours. Both rely on interpretation and in all cases since the outcome is unknown, either is a "right" as the other.

You are simply not applying the same amount of thought to your the control phrase as your picked phrase. Let me illustrate

"can i win the million dollar paranormal prize"

The answer is referencing the fact that previously winning has been a problem, and that this trend will continue in the future.

When will herc die?

At some point in your past you have came close to death. This will be the same method you will die in the future.

How do you know you are adam.

The knowledge of being Adam, is gained through similar problems both you and adam have suffered in the past. There providing evidence you are the same person.

What can Adam do that would qualify for the JREF million dollar prize?

The answer is stating that even with powers it would be hard to prove the existance of said powers. Which ( from what some applicants would have use believe) has been quite a problem in the past.

Why are you being tortured by the government?

Your questions which have gotten you in trouble in the past are the reason that the government is torturing you.

Will Megan Fox win the Oscar for best actress in 2010?

This question has been bothering people for some time , look to her trend of winning awards in previous years to determine the outcome.


Will Edmond Wollman ever pay back Susan Boyle?

He has done things of this nature before, so he obviously will again this time.

Now i must say this is all bullflop , but as you can see the control , if anything provided better answers than your random text.

The point being, since you didn't want the control to seem like it made sense , it didn't make sense to you. Yet when i put a little thought behind it, the same way you did with your answers, suddenly it is a fortune telling.

Both of us had the exact same results, neither of us have powers. I can assure you i am about as magical as a baked potato. There is nothing spooky about being able to connect any phrase to any question. It is simply pattern seeking.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 26, 2009
Ok, try it with the control phrase "I would like a hard boiled egg".


I just got the funniest email from Jeff Wagg. He CLAIMS he got these answers to the questions!


I grabbed the book "The History and Mystery of the Menger Hotel" off the shelf. Its not a book of much importance to me.

Here are the questions and answers:

Why are you being tortured by the government?
"... historical associations"


HAHAHAHAHA he just gave the exact answer why the government tortures people, he just broke million to one odds with that answer. All his other answers were chosen aswell, like "she was presented with the Aladesa award" to answer if Megan Fox won the Oscar. I suggested Jeff try to do it on video since he broke a trillion to one odds with all his answers, see if he complies. Hint: he won't do it on video. What a mob of lying cheaters.

Herc
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
RE:Herc
written by JeffWagg, September 26, 2009
I did agree to do it on video, though like the vast majority of you, I know that ANYONE could do this at any time.

It may seem cruel that I'm humoring Herc in this way, but I'm doing it out of research. I will not entertain these vanities with other challenge applicants.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 26, 2009
Ok, it's after midnight, and I'm going to bed. You do not have my permission to post the video.

Jeff



Gee thanks Jeff, very open scientific method you have there.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
@herc
written by JeffWagg, September 26, 2009
Sigh.. for those following, Herc asked permission to post my video on his site with one he made as well. I asked him some questions about it, and he didn't answer. He didn't reply at all as of this writing. So I sent the e-mail that I was going to bed. I'll let him post the video when he answers my questions.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 26, 2009
Maybe I needed more than 17 minutes between your posts to upload to Youtube??
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by randi, September 27, 2009
FYI - I asked "Herc" for the name of the book he used in his ridiculous bibliomancy test video. He ignored the request, indicating that he feared I'd find other phrases or words there that did NOT satisfy his needs. I never heard back from him...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Herc seriously , come on.
written by Sadhatter, September 27, 2009
I did the test with the phrase you chose to point out that you simply were not interpreting the control sentence to mean anything because you didn't want to.

Of course you , after making the questions can find a phrase that would be difficult to interpret as the answer. ( though not impossible, i am simply not wasting any more of my time with this particular vein of inquiry.) But we have proven that one phrase that you picked for the sole purpose of not making sense as the answer, can easily apply as well as any of your answers.

The simple fact is that if you want it to almost any group of random words can have " meaning", sure there is going to be a few groupings that almost cannot be connected to a specific question, but that is like playing darts and thinking you won by not hitting the bullseye.

And none of this is even scratching the surface of the fact that your answers are things that are not easily verified. Why not simply sit down with a random number generator. Ask which number will come up, do your thing, then when you have your phrase, divine from it what the next number will be. After you have done this THEN hit the number generator. If you have a power you should be very nearly 100% accurate. If not your guesses will fall into random chance , maybe slightly above, maybe slightly below. But remember before trying this at home the key is to get your bibliomantic answer BEFORE the number is generated. This takes away the subjectivity and ability to fool yourself.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 27, 2009
@Jeff, I answered your questions unfortunately you've gone quiet. You agreed to answer questions from a book to
debunk my claim and now you refuse to let people see the video. Very strange for a professional skeptic.

@SadHatter, I've had other people confirm my answers were better than the control phrase. Like I said from the start
find a control phrase yourself. For the 10th time I only channel info I actually want, not random numbers.

@James, you didn't email that question to notme@notgmail.com did you? I said use xxx@australia.edu in my sig.
You're supposed to read emails to the end. The book is Burning Chrome by William Gibson. Why would I be afraid
if you found a phrase that I did not channel?

If Jeff has nothing to hide and comes forward, then we can compare the videos with the 3 new questions.

Herc
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by Herc, September 27, 2009
I have a 2nd claim.

I will donate $3000 to JREF if Randi or a staff member flies to Australia, meets me in public
for 5 minutes, and if he can HEAR MY THOUGHTS I win the $1,000,000. If they want to go to
a new location to verify there is no hidden PA somewhere I'll go anywhere they like.

I did send my CC details to Aus Skeptics for a seat at Briskepticon but they never charged my card.

Herc
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by Herc, September 27, 2009
I designed a fair test which works with the "no judgement procedure" clause.


Bibliomancy test protocol

The test is done is 2 phases.


Phase 1

I am given a printout of 100 questions with a declaration that the authors of the questions
have a genuine interest in what the answers are. Questions like "What's in the envelope?",
"What was my dead grandfather's hobby?", "What horse will win a race?" are not usable.
I will review the questions and ask for replacements as required.

My sister or another volunteer of my choosing is placed in a closed booth with no communications
outside of the booth.

I select one book to use for the entire 100 questions.

I read out each question in turn. After each question I open a book to a random page,
I begin reading the 1st words or sentence I focus on within 1/2 second of opening the page.
I read a maximum of 2 sentences.

2 control participants use the same book and the same technique to get their 100 'answers'.



Phase 2

The questions and the 3 randomly sorted answers for each question are printed out and given
to my sister. She has 2 hours to mark which answer she thinks is the most appropriate. The number
of times she selects my answer will be my score.

The hypothesis is there is no normal means within the current understanding of science that a person
in a closed booth could tell which phrases were selected by the claimant, as they were selected with
a random process the same as the control's answers were. This is why the same book has to be used
because someone familiar with the book could recognise some phrases, also the claimant should
open the book at various positions, always selecting the final chapter could give a clue to who got
those answers.



What constitutes a pass?

The average expected result is 33/100.

According to the binomial distribution, see www.automeasure.com/chance.html

For 1/3 probability, 100 trials, the expected result is between 21 - 45.
To go outside this range defeats 100 to 1 odds.

Unless JREF insists on 1000 to 1 odds for the preliminary test that will be my target (46/100).

To defeat 10,000 to 1 odds, I must score outside this range
For 1/3 probability, 100 trials, the expected result is between 15 - 52.

To defeat 1,000,000 to 1 odds, I must score outside this range
For 1/3 probability, 100 trials, the expected result is between 11 - 57.

For the final test:
If I defeat 100 to 1 odds, but not 1,000,000 to 1 odds, then I can do a 2nd and 3rd trial, one trial per day.
Defeating 100 to 1 3 times running would defeat 1,000,000 to 1, or defeating 1,000 to 1 2 times running
would also defeat 1,000,000 to 1.

-----------------------------------

If JREF allow me to do the channelling using video conferencing, and a suitable volunteer at JREF can match
the answers we could do the test as soon as you're ready.

Herc
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
What You Want?
written by Sadhatter, September 28, 2009
Come on, seriously, this is as easy to point out the error in as anything else you type.

The result of you knowing these numbers would mean that you are proving your power. And would give you information that would absolutely prove your power (along with one million dollars, which you obviously want, due to your attempts to claim the prize.). You obviously "want" to prove your power, and this would give you the information to do so. Hence this would obviously be information you would "want", if you legitimately believed you had a power.

But as is obvious, you do not, you are simply looking for attention , as evidenced by your dodging of any protocol that would definitely disprove yourself, and attempting to set up a "test" in which a jref member comes to you.

Honestly, i could spend the rest of my night citing reasons you would "want" to know the outcome of the random number generator. But i am going to do what i feel James, Jeff, and the rest of the jref should be doing, and simply ignore your claim, of what can only be described as a Non-power.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Herc, September 28, 2009
But I still have no direct interest in the answer.

Now Jeff has acted as control you're going to run and hide? You're not very confident he did just as well as me are you?

Herc
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
newshopstyle
written by newshopstyle, November 02, 2009
This versatile styling tool has an ergonomic design and curved edge plates to create any style from straight to curly and everything in between. With a flash heating element and fixed temperature setting, the power to create the style of your dreams is your hands.
GHD Hair Straighteners
CHI Hair Straighteners
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
Last Updated on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 20:47