Witch Professor

witchcraft spells
cast a great spell that is gonna workout for you within seven days dont be fooled am here to help the power and the rich, black or white
Equality is the thing not colours and money.
call for your lover to back with you and wealthy problems.

Google, for some reason known only to their algorithm writers, displayed an ad for this page on my gmail account, so I thought I’d mosey on over and take a look.

The first thing that struck me was the old-fashioned, amateurish and annoying red-on-black text that makes your eyes bleed if you look at it for too long. But you wouldn’t spend much time looking at this site, and you don’t have to because I’ve done it for you.

According to this Proff character, his mumbled incantations can help you achieve wealth, health, love and a longer, heftier penis (all the better to piss through, my dear). Well, this sounds almost too good to be true, so I decided to drop him a line:

From: Mark Widdicombe 17 February 2010 11:02
To: proff@ssanga.co.za
Hello Proff,

I came across your website whilst researching alternative medical modalities. On your page you state:

Spell casting is becoming more and more accepted by mainstream society. And for one simple reason: it works!

Could you point me to any objective studies that indicate that spell casting works, or is that based only on your own experience?

Regards,
Mark

Quick as a flash his auto reply landed in my inbox:

i will help within seven days
From: proff ssanga 17 February 2010 11:02
To: Mark Widdicombe

thanks for your request but,remember to send me your photos and both names i will checck and see how to help you within seven days. Contact me on +27713032860. NB:send your detail andress. YOUR LOST LOVER WILL GET BACK TO YOU WITHIN SEVEN DAYS IF YOU PROVIDE ME WITH ALL YOUR DETAILS AND HER DETAILS TOO SO,FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME’I WILL GET BACK TO YOU WITHIN 10MINUTES.THANKS

Clearly the majority of his clients require their flat love relationships reinflated. Why would he need photos for that, anyway? Perhaps to see whether or not you would be pleased if your lost lover got back to you.

After a while I received an answer to my question:

Spells?
From: proff@ssanga.co.za 17 February 2010 11:56
To: Mark Widdicombe
[Quoted text hidden]

yes it does due to my experience as a professional native healer for the past 25years and i have helped many people like you and all of the have been asking the same question as you’re asking so,feel free to contact me i will explain.thanks 0713032860

Unfortunately my ‘wealthy problems’ preclude my being able to spend airtime on getting the good Proff’s explanation, but I must assume that the answer to my question regarding research is negative, otherwise surely he would have linked to it in his email. Which is a great pity, I could do with the intervention of metaphysical forces in my “Love, financial situations, Misfortunes, Court cases, Marriage and witches”, even though I’m perfectly content with the dimensions of my penis.

Creative Commons License
Grumpy Old Man by Mark Widdicombe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 License.

Advertisements

31 Responses to Witch Professor

  1. Mark says:

    Those are pretty good–thanks for the heads up.

  2. james butterworth says:

    he would need the picture for something to focus his mind on while casting the spell. all witches worth their brooms know this. think of magic as an animated whip. you hold it in your hand, but the tip lashes about uncontrolledly unless you anchor it to something, in this case the person in the picture. the request for personal details is also valid, because one cannot simply direct their energy at ‘this slightly-out-of-focus pinkish blob here’ but rather towards ‘jane smith, 123 fake lane, inventville, south africa’. in other words, without these things, the spell WOULD ALWAYS fail, instead of standing a snowflake’s chance in hell as you no doubt believe.

    due to the very misty and subjective nature of his spells, no scientific study could really definitively say whether they had worked, or perhaps the placebo effect in the form of your increased confidence after consulting him made the lover in question change her mind about you, for instance

    what i really really want to know is how he’s supposed to make your penis bigger perhaps by rubbing it and applying reiki?

    • Mark says:

      You went to Hogwarts, right?

    • James: “due to the very misty and subjective nature of his spells, no scientific study could really definitively say whether they had worked, or perhaps the placebo effect in the form of your increased confidence after consulting him made the lover in question change her mind about you, for instance”

      Why do you say that? If magic exists, and a person claims to be able to do X, ask them to do X and then see whether X happened or not. That’s just common sense, and that’s exactly what I scientific experiment would do. If I claim I can do a backflip, you’d want to see me do it. If, after you’ve given me several tries (maybe over a couple of weeks) and I can’t produce the goods, then you’ll reasonably conclude either that I was lying or that I am deluded. I don’t see how “magic” is nay different from this. (Sure, you *could* make it unfalsifiable by saying it disappears when critical minds are around but that would be silly).

      Also: if it’s the placebo effect, it’s not magic.

      • Mark says:

        Right on the button. If it didn’t work every time I would still expect to see a significant statistical effect over lots of attempts. For example there is no statistical increase in the number of people cured of dread diseases who have visited Lourdes compared to those who haven’t. I am entitled to conclude from this that the claims of miracles are hogwash. Likewise for any other claims of mysticism and magic.

      • Sorry for the typos. Reread fail…

      • And, Mark, exactly. One can always “save” magical claims by making ad hoc adjustments (it’s too subtle to detect, “Western science” can’t detect it, the phenomena are “shy”, etc.) but that’s obviously special pleading and deserves ridicule, not a serious hearing.

    • One thing we can be sure of is that the witch doctor (I cannot bring myself to call him “professor”) will experience an decrease in his ‘wealthy problems’, and anyone naive enough to consult him would be too terrified of black magic to challenge him if his spell was unsuccessful.

      We are not dealing with rational people here, remember, this is the “smoking vulture brains will make you win the lotto crowd”, if you can believe in tenuous correlations like that you might as well carry on believing that witch doctors can solve all of your problems instead of, I don’t know, DEBT COUNSELING!

      James, I find your claim that “due to the very misty and subjective nature of his spells, no scientific study could really definitively say whether they had worked” a touch on the naive side. A study could very clearly demonstrate whether or not his mumbo jumbo has any effect, you see, he is making very specific claims. “I can make your penis bigger”, ok well all you need to do is recruit 50 volunteers, give the witch doctor a pic and address for each man, measure the length and girth of their member before and after 7 days. What is so misty about that? Either it works or it does not. That would certainly rule out the placebo effect.

  3. Con-Tester says:

    I thought, perhaps naïvely, that James was being a touch obscurely tongue-in-cheek. As that song says, “You never can tell.”

    Magic that works reliably is called science. How many people do you know who can render on demand a reasonably detailed, accurate and cogent account of how this or that modern gadget works?

  4. james butterworth says:

    con-tester, surely the engineers who designed it can? and possibly anyone else with a good knowledge of electronics? for instance, I happen to know that the touch pad on a modern i-pod works the same way as a sharks electrical sense, by measuring the electrical conductivity of your finger and comparing it to the background level as experienced elsewhere on the pad. to the uneducated, that’s magic, sure, but a thinking person knows otherwise.

    clearly being the only witch in this discussion, I speak from experience, though not to defend professor mumbo jumbo (pictured above). early in my magical studies, I browsed the internet constantly in search of spells to try, and found many, many different things promising for instance a permanent change of eye-colour to making your hair curly by eating peanut butter sandwiches, but never any penis embigginators. when i found one listing in its instructions 2. cast live dog into fire… I stopped randomly using the web for that purpose.

    Pratchett fans will know of headology. headology works, but cannot be observed by an outside party. it’s directly between the caster and recipient, with no sparkly twing or even a vague heat shimmer, but can be felt by both parties as having worked or failed. personally, I helped my friend through a convulsive siezure, reducing random spazms, back arching and crying in pain to mere relaxed whimpering, by laying on of hands and chanting, get this, NOT ONCE BUT NO LESS THAN 10 TIMES. each time was successful to a lesser or greater degree, depending on my state of mind at the time. for instance, fatigue reduced the effectiveness, while mild inebriation seemed to boost the effect significantly and even bring the siezure to and early conclusion.

    a final note. AURAS ARE REAL. I can see them with impunity, almost at will. last night, I was sitting outside with a friend, under a sensor-light, when it suddenly switched off (auras are best seen by staring at someone then suddenly closing your eyes and observing the after-image, but can also be seen in the light) and I made a startling realisation. it’s nothing more or less than the electrical activity in your brain making itself visible. don’t ask me how this happens, but i could clearly see that when he was talking creatively, his right side aura was much bigger than the left, and then it immediately shifted when we started talking logic.

    remember: THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT THE EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE

  5. james butterworth says:

    to all: i realise my posts are long and at times, antagonistic. this is not my intention, but rather to explain as best i can the alternate point of view. I have a deeply ingrained respect for the scientific process, etc and although i’m a witch, I don’t buy into the whole ‘smoke a vulture’s brains to win the lottery’ thing, as my sister put it. nor am i particularly religious, believing rather that each person has it within themselves to be divine, through their actions and treatment of others, and their love of life itself.

    • Con-Tester says:

      james butterworth wrote (February 22, 2010 at 17:32):

      I have a deeply ingrained respect for the scientific process, etc…

      No, you don’t. Your prior testimonial re “helping” your friend “through a convulsive siezure” [sic] wholly refutes you.

  6. james butterworth says:

    hey all i know is she was writhing in agony before i started and settled down within a minute of me starting. I also felt drained of energy afterwards and had to spend a few minutes recovering.
    just because humans have not yet found a way to scientifically explain magic, does not mean it does not exist.
    and, please, don’t be so presumptious as to tell ME what I respect or don’t. that really pisses me off.

    What I like about witchcraft is that it lets one define their own pantheon, rituals, etc and I have decided that if anything on earth can be called a deity, it’s the earth itself:
    1)it gives us life
    2)it created us through benevolent conditions and evolution
    3)it is all around us and affects our lives every day

    it does not, however, care for us, grant our wishes, or ‘save our souls’ when we die, and is not, in itself, alive or conscious.

    therefore i’m not religious. so what does that leave me? science. Now I look forward eagerly to the day when magic can be explained scientifically, or measured with a device, but until then, you don’t know what I know,and your whiney-assed opinion has been noted.

    • Con-Tester says:

      Yes, I’m sure you’re entirely convinced by all of that – mostly, I expect, because you were already convinced of it before those events happened (cf. “confirmation bias”). It’s ironic that you should level accusations of “presumptiousness” [sic] at me when I gave adequate, indeed ample, reason for why you are quite plainly and brazenly talking crap when you assert “a deeply ingrained respect for the scientific process.” You see, delusionals who deliberately lie to protect their soft-headed delusions find little favour with me.

      And it’s not a question of whether “humans have not yet found a way to scientifically explain magic.” Before attempting to explain some purported phenomenon, one must first demonstrate that there is, in fact, something there to explain in the first place. The story of René Blondlot and his N-rays is instructive in this context.

      The scientific process you so casually subvert to your own ends immovably demands that an unproven hypothesis is rejected, pending convincing evidence supporting it, and no amount of whiny-assed whingeing about how little others know about what you know is going to carry any weight. Rhetoric is no substitute for evidence, and evidence is not negotiable.

      • james butterworth says:

        no further comments will be posted. I’m clearly being misunderstood, misinterpreted and mocked. you have clearly never tried it yourself, so don’t tell me what’s real or not. your own ‘SKEPTIC WITH BIG STICK OF ENLIGHTENMENT’ routine wears thin very fast.

      • Con-Tester says:

        “[M]isunderstood, misinterpreted and mocked,” you say, James? Where, please? In a situation such as this one, people can only take you at the face value of that which you yourself have presented. It’s then up to you to explain yourself properly if you feel your efforts are misconstrued, or to withdraw as you indicate.

        And if, after the above outburst, I had replied to you, just for example, with “Yes, a good fuming sulk is much improved when preceded by a stamping off of little feet” then that would be mockery… 😆

  7. james butterworth says:

    I have been reminded not to argue with fools… I tried to present evidence for my case, but none of you seem to think it’s worth the mildest investigation.

    Please remember not to take things at face value always and not to become skeptic yes-men, as I see here.

    forgive me for thinking I could stimulate a debate, when all everyone else wanted was to agree with the original poster about how much of a quack the guy is…

    Do you always believe everything you read in a reputable science mag? and when it’s later refuted, do you immediately say ‘I knew it all along’?
    I thought so

    • Mark says:

      no further comments will be posted. I’m clearly being misunderstood, misinterpreted and mocked. you have clearly never tried it yourself, so don’t tell me what’s real or not. your own ‘SKEPTIC WITH BIG STICK OF ENLIGHTENMENT’ routine wears thin very fast.

      This reminds me strongly of the Monty Python sketch. “I came here for an argument.” “Oh, I’m sorry, this is abuse. Arguments are second door down on the left.”

      James, you have been consistently rude to anyone who disagrees with you. Please treat people with the respect I’m sure you would like for yourself. I leave your comments where they are, because a) I believe in free speech, and b) you do your cause plenty of harm by your petulent attitude.

    • Con-Tester says:

      I see. So the sum total of your argument, James, is that you, through personal experience, know what others don’t, that I, as a sceptic, am rude and that not everything appearing in scientific journals is valid. First, I’m forthright and abrupt (not unprovokedly so, as a casual inspection will reveal) because I’m deeply weary of BS artists and their wily ways – as if that needed explaining. Second, I strongly urge you to look up the meaning of “non sequitur.” Third, you would do well to design and conduct a series of experiments before writing them up with their findings and submitting them for rigorous review. It’s really not that hard if you have the stomach for some elementary statistics, a bit of editorial to-and-fro and the humility to accept relevant criticism. Fourth, you then need to muster the patience to wait until someone else attempts to replicates your results, at which point you can then laud their successful efforts, variously criticise their failure to substantiate your conclusions.

      That’s what a “deeply ingrained respect for the scientific process” would require of you instead of, say, huffily railing against the obtuseness of foolish sceptics and sceptical fools.

  8. James, firstly, I take exception to being called a fool. Secondly, I think you’re being very uncharitable here. Con-Tester was very direct with you – perhaps even ‘mean’ – but I see little evidence of close-mindedness.

    You made some claims. These, as you know, lay far outside the mainstream. For that reason alone you have the onus. The evidence you have provided here, however, is clearly insufficient to come close to proving your case. You gave us some anecdotes, all of which have alternative and far simpler explanations. (I am, however, more than willing to conducted an informal but rigorously controlled ‘study’ with you if you like. You might even be in for $1 million if you pull it off a couple of times.)

    By the way, I regularly read papers in peer-reviewed journals I disagree with so, no, I don’t believe everything I read in reputable sources (let alone the popular media). Indeed, I’m writing a critical comment on a Proc Roy Soc B paper at the moment.

  9. Thabo Nthebe says:

    Proff.
    I have a few requests that i hope you could meet: i) my money is held back in the government @ say SARS and i want it released. ii) my old lover -Motselisi Letele is taken by another man, I want her back. I have no photos. iii) my children are with thier mothers and their mothers refuse me to see them. iv)man called Mike Moloi refuses to pay back my money R20 000-00, and I want it back. v) this few Abner casts evil spell towards and i want the same happen to him and these spell stop now.

  10. devi says:

    professor
    i am an indian girl
    i lost my lover four months back, after that my mind is totally disturbed and life is difficult for me now.
    is there any way to get my lover back. if yes please send me a mail

  11. Deon Goldstone says:

    Hi,I’m seein this female for almost a year now,I love her,but she is not showin no love back,but she loves being with me cos I make happy,and she keeps sayin we should be jus friends,we still make love to each other.I want her to change her mind about us an love me back and want too live an marry her.Her name is Prashni Moodley

  12. our homepage says:

    Great article, thank you for your time in creating it.

  13. Yes! Finally something about make your penis bigger.

  14. What’s up mates, how is the whole thing, and what you
    wish for to say concerning this article, in my view its genuinely remarkable in support of me.

  15. Wow, awesome weblog structure! How long have you
    ever been running a blog for? you make blogging look easy. The whole look of your site is fantastic,
    as neatly as the content material!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: