Don, just for clarification are you saying that in your opinion, all purported examples of mediumship (mental and physical) are in reality examples of psi/esp or that some  may be better thought of in that way? There's a big difference....

Here are 2 channeling exceptions that just might be genuine contact with the dead.  (1) Runolfor Runolfsson [RR] made his abrupt and uninvited appearance at medium Hafsteinn Bjornsson’s sitting and surprised those present by his rudeness and his rough and uncouth demands.  He refused to give his name.  He demanded coffee and snuff which he hoped to enjoy vicariously through the medium and threw a tantrum when this request was denied.  When asked what he wanted, he gave the shocking reply that he was “looking for his leg,” which he claimed was “in the sea.”  Then when Ludvik Gudmendsson joined the circle, RR greeted him as if he knew him and insisted that his leg was in LG’s house.  LG knew nothing about this and promised to help him if he would offer his mane.  Oddly, RR again declined and left the séance in a huff.

Had RR forgotten his name?  He originally insisted his leg was “in the sea.”   So why did LG’s arrival allow RR to learn that his leg was in fact in his house?  After all, LG had found 2 skulls in his house, but knew nothing of the leg. 

Months later RR interrupted a séance and seemed to shove the other spirit communicators aside!  This time he gave his name, the date of his death, and his age (52) at the time of his death.  He added that proof of this could be found in the records at Utskalar Church where his remains lay buried.  In the intervening months, had RR somehow recovered his earthly identity?  Why don’t ADCs and channeling provide such striking verifications more often? 

RR then told this strange story.  One evening in October, 1879, he had passed out drunk on the beach during a raging storm.  His body had been washed out to sea and his remains washed up on shore the following January.  Dogs and ravens had torn it to bits and the remains were buried at Utskalar Churchyard 4 miles away.  A thigh bone had been washed out to sea, only to wash up on shore again.  LG had found 2 skulls in the house he bought, but no thigh bone.  He questioned 2 of the oldest men in the town about whether they had heard anything about a missing thigh bone.  One of the men recalled that the carpenter had put a thigh bone between the inner and outer wall.  The bone could not be buried in the cemetery because the identity of its owner was unknown.  LG tracked down the carpenter who opened the wall and found the unusually long thigh bone.  In this case, it is hard for me to believe that the medium derived his information about the thigh bone by reading the carpenter’s mind.  The unusual bone length is important because R had identified himself as a very tall  man.  LG had a casket made for it and buried it with the rest of RR’s remains at Utskalar Church. 

Haraldsson and Stevenson interviewed more than 20 people connected with the case, including the medium and all the sitters.  They also examined the public records to see if the medium could have gained this knowledge through ordinary means.  The Utskalar Church records mentioned the date of RR’s death and his age (52) at the time of death.  Beyond that, the record mentioned that RR’s body had been carried out to sea, but only added that his dismembered bones later washed up on shore.  Neither this record nor the 2 Icelandic newspapers of the time mentioned that any bones were missing.

(2) Houdini failed to keep his promise to his wife to confirm his survival beyond the grave.  But two distinguished professors may well have succeeded.  William James (Harvard) and James Hyslop (Columbia) promised each other that whoever died first would contact the survivor and confirm the reality of the afterlife. William died first, but nothing happened; so Hyslop forgot about their pledge.  Then a year later, Hyslop was contacted by a couple in Ireland.  They had been playing with a Ouija board and were continually receiving an insistent message from a William James, who kept on saying, "Track down my friend, James Hyslop, and give him this message, `Remember the red pyjamas.'"   For quite some time the Irish couple did nothing.  They had never heard of WJ or JH and the message seemed silly to them.  But then curiosity prompted them to try and track Hyslop down.  When they gave him the message, he was initially dismissive.  But then he remembered a conference he and WJ had attended in Paris during the winter.  Their luggage had not arrived and both men had to shop for winter essentials.   Hyslop was forced to buy some gaudy red pyjames and WJ had relentlessly teased him about his taste.  WJ apparently sent this message because its vivid and concrete nature made it less susceptible to interpretive distortion.   

Don

Don-

I'd first like to make a distinction between proving something beyond  reasonable doubt and beyond absolute doubt. I don't know many things which can be proved absolute doubt, as you remarked with your moon landing example, so I'll confine my discussion to reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities.

Your scepticism to mediumship is different from  many people's in that you accept that something 'paranormal' may be occurring but you are doubting its source. When I first started looking at mediumship my objections were different. I had no prior ideas of whether it was 'wrong' or 'right' (in a moral sense) only that they were obviously faking it. This came from 'cold reading' (reading subtle clues), 'hot reading' (fraud), confirmation bias (gullibility) or using generalised statements (Barnum effect). I believe now, that by surveying the available literature, that beyond reasonable doubt that these can be ruled out of some sittings.

This then leaves the possibility that (a) the 'hits' are psychic but not mediumistic (b) entities other than the purported ones are coming through (c) the desired deceased are coming through with information.

I would question that (a) is happening in all cases because as Schwartz says about LC (one of his research mediums ' close examination of the language used indicates that she is not simply reporting memories and images... also reporting intentions and interpretations reflecting the information processing of 'entities' (her words), or dynamically changing info-energy systems (Schwartz's words). Also mediums also tend to distinguish themselves between 'dead' information which comes psychically e.g.picking up emotions from an object i.e. psychometry and that from a 'living' discarnate who may interrupt, correct or answer questions.

You give two good examples of information gleaned unknown to both medium and sitter, I would suggest that is not uncommon. There are enough anecdotal accounts of readings passing on information to the sitter such as where the bank book is kept, information unknown about another relative which later checked out true to suggest simple mind reading is not taking place in many instances.

Possibility (b) is even harder to categorically rule out i.e. that an impersonator is coming through. But to this I would respond that providing that the tone of the message is one of love and the character of the entitity matches that of the deceased then that it actually is the deceased is a distinct likelihood. I would draw a parallel with the notion that such entities are 'demonic' with the allegation by some of his contemporaries that Jesus was in league with the Devil i.e. essentially not making any sense when such love is  involved.

At the start of the thread you used an example of alleged mediumship when the 'deceased' was actually alive. Although this offers a caution against taking things at face value you must admit that in the vast majority of cases the deceased is definitely known to be dead !

Because of the points above I believe, in line with the 'Occam's razor' principle that in some cases mediums are actually in contact with individual identified discarnates. Which cases ?.....that's where the discernment comes in !
D

I am ready to respond to this now.


Mediums have been tested to know facts that they could not have known because even the sitter did not know about the information until they verified it later. This if proven scientifically...

(Technically Gary in theory did very specific tests involving no contact at all with the sitters in The Afterlife Experiments book.)

So let's say that the medium is able to tell you about a jack of hearts they are seeing for some strange reason. It turns out, the sitter placed a random card that they did not even see on the top of a book shelf, and asked the deceased to name the card in the session.

You couldn't explain that as simple mind reading. It would be way too complicated.

Lucky guess?

Impossible, too complicated.

Demons, evil spirits playing with you?

Ok, maybe....

A collective consciousness / higher power?

Maybe.

Connecting to a raw data of a person, like a memory or hard drive?

Too complicated, how could this hard drive see and respond to active questions.

So let us say that this situation is true. Occams Razor would dictate the only answer being only ONE simple answer:

Some higher power was connected with be it demon, God, or spirit.



Now, to go into further details, which of these is the simplest possibility of the three????

I do NOT Know if God exists....

I do NOT know if Demons exist...

I DO KNOW that people exist...

Therefore, scientifically, the simplest answer would be contact with a spirit or essence / consciousness of the dead loved one.

This hypothesis is directly based off of the facts that mediums give that are unknown to anyone, yet are verifiable after the fact.

If Occam's Razor were applied in ancient times:

* Attributing lightening and thunder to an angry god would be the simpler explanation than the mechanics of meteorology.

* Concluding that the world is flat would be the simpler explanation than its true configuration as a round planet circling the sun since no one could attain the altitude necessary to see the earth as it really is.

I'm sure there are many other examples.

So perhaps our brains communicate in ways we have yet to discover.  Perhaps there is some sort of collective unconscious that certain folks can tap into.

Perhaps the reasons we conclude there is an afterlife will some day be attributable to other reasons.

And then again, perhaps not.

Fact is, no one really knows.

R

Exactly, the energy that is our thoughts is very similar or the exact same as the energy as a dead person. This would easily confuse a medium and make it possible for a person to invent a dead person in they're minds.

Regardless, mediums have been able to report facts that were unknown to ANYONE. These facts can later be verified and the only answer is that the medium is fraud and had major detective work done. (way unlikely.) or the medium was able to hear the information from the spirit. IE. a playing card no one has seen, not even the sitter. Oh and the sitter did not mention that there was a card to the medium, the medium simply saw it in they're head suddenly and of course had no idea why. I can't seem to find any way to explain this other than the simplest answer which is that the medium was shown the card... someone showed the image (in they're head) to the medium as proof that the dead person was really coming through. Of course it could be a demon or some other power, but that adds MORE complication since like I said, I have no proof that any demons or Gods exist. But I DO KNOW people exist.

Edit:

I just wanted to add that I DO UNDERSTAND where the skepticism comes from.

Also I DO UNDERSTAND the points against mediums that you are making.

I STILL question it myself, but, I have had a reading from a spiritual medium and I cannot explain it. To me, to say that a medium is simply reading the mind of the sitter just seems incorrect. Sure, I can pretend I have an uncle named Billy Bob and all kinds of facts and yes, the medium will get that information, but this does not mean that the medium is simply reading my mind. It could in fact be a major point that shows that my thoughts, the true me, is the same thing the medium is reading. I am a thought. My dead friends are a thought. We are all thoughts and when we die we are just thoughts again.

::clicks the submit button sending invisible thoughts through wireless internet so you can see::

.... surely if Occam's razor meant we simply chose the option of what we already knew ( or thought we knew) as the 'simplest' then human growth/exploration would come to a shuddering halt as we would always be reconfirming what we already knew !