I think that we've come back to methodology. This topic has been around before (and will doubtless be back again later) and arises from two factors. First, we do not "know how" ESP phenomena arise. We just discover it. Like Old Dood, I, and several friendas, used to amuse ourselves on lazy afternoons poking a piece of mobile art dangling on a thread in my living room. We'd swing it right, we'd swing it left, and we'd get it to stop and reverse etc. The process was rather slow, maybe ten or twenty seconds to get it moving, so we never could prove that it wasn't air currents. However, despite our lack of knowledge of the mechanism and the lack of ability to falsify our claim that we were moving it, the darn thing moved.  -  Keep practicing, Dood, probably you'll recall the technique. I can still make things wiggle (sometimes).

OBEs have the same trouble. Each of us does an individual ESP routine and gets some kind of data. It is not necessary to understand what is happening any more than it would be necessary to understand how to grow your hair. It simply happens.  -  And if it doesn't, there's the Hair Club and Rogaine.

The only implication for pure logic is that observed ESP phenomena are bound by the same criteria of logical consistency as all other phenomena. That means that we can guess at what's happening, but aside from looking at the logical consistency with other datas, we have nothing solid. I like the hospital excursions in surgery as a great example of this. There's lots of them, universally denied by the medicos, and universally believed by the surgical patients.  And in general they're frighteningly accurate - makes me wonder about anesthesiology as the next source of serendipitous discovery.

The issue is one of proper methodology. Given nothing but historical information, the conservative MUST doubt - that's the nature of scientific conservatism. The liberal MUST believe (or at least hope) - that's the nature of liberalism. These two extremes are equally undesirable because they lock us into a position without recourse. The only appropriate posture is that of a scientific investigator who is very clear that methodologically, we are dealing with a vast amount of information that is processed uniquely in every case, yet leads to a commonly perceived outcome, sometimes demonstrably accurate, sometimes not.

As an example of a closed mind, I once tested an engineering student with Zener cards. For 100 trials the SD is 4, and he got something like 20 corect, a Z-score of 4.0. That's so unlikely I was amazed and I pointed it out to him. He denied it, said it was all a bunch of bunk, and proceded to get all but about 4 cards wrong in the next trial, which is even more astounding! However, my engineering student blithely denied it all. Maybe he took statistics next term and got the actual message. (Notice that this was not an "experiment" because it had no control group, so could not be falsified. It was a typical "one-shot, quasi-experiemntal technique".)

The well known methodologists, Campbell and Stanley, (I use their monograph when I teach experimental methodology)  would tell us that ALL our ESP observations are a vast collection of "one-shot, non-controlled observations", and that this is a "quasi-experimental technique". The word "quasi-" is there because in a true experiment we can disprove a null hypothesis (the claim that there is nothing happening, no effect) through suitable control groups and distribution of experimental treatments. These are unavailable. All we can control is the situation. Therefor, criticisms and arguments applicable to controlled experimental technique are not appropriate here.

The idea of a "white crow" observation actually does not apply here because we have so much confounding by unknown factors that we can never produce a "black crow" against which to test it. As a result, we can wheedle and carp over our pet notions indefinitely. Talking about the topic is far less useful than actual involvement, but talking seems to be ever so much more logical. That's because our observational data are so muddled, that it is a relief to be able to use nice clear verbal concepts instead. So we place our faith in talking about what is true or false, all the while deluding ourselves into thinking that this somehow clarifies it. It doesn't. It merely adds another level of confounding.

Some people give fake reports, or report about people not actually dead. So what? - I recall Bruce's exploration when he channelled Snidely Whiplash. The "stuff" of the experience came from "somewhere", and turned out to be concordant with popular opinion. That neither "proves" anything about Snidely, nor about Bruce. What it tells us is that if we go looking for something, there will probably be a way to find it. If the intended target of a seance is real we'll get real data. If the target turns out to be fictional, we get fictional data culled from some source of information that we can only guess at. And very likely, in all cases we'll get a few errors - maybe lots of them - even with a valid spiritual contact. While this gives little information about that contact, it tells us something about the process - that's potentially useful information.

There are two generic criteria to consider, validity and reliability. To be valid, the experience must do what it purports to do. If you seek to channel Scoobie Doo, then it must be Scoobie Doo, and not Abe Lincoln. If you channel Bob Jones, then it must be the proper Bob Jones, and not someone else by a similar name. Often we have no idea of who is actually on the other end of the ESP linkage, so we have little or no control over the validity of what we receive. This is a simple experiemental fact.

Reliability means that we do the same thing over and over again. Superficially, we can see the channel repeat the same process and get a similar kind of result. Whether that is actually the same process internally, and in terms of spiritual interaction, is unknown. Thus we have very poor control over reliability.  We do have the channels' assurance that they are doing it the same way each time, but that cannot be tested.

The only way to get around these issues is to agree that we are dealing with the behavior of a "black box" that sometimes produces data, and that often is inexplicably wrong, and occasionally right. That places all the "I don't know" type arguments inside the "black box" and leaves us where we started, analyzing what we observe. That means that Snidely Whiplash is a legitimate ESP target, just as is Great Aunt Gussie.

The idea that groups channel the same being comes back to the untestability of individual processing. However, the data can be used to indicate that there is consistency, which implies "similar black boxes" are in operation "in a simlar manner". There are ways to use that data to make inferences, and I hope that Bruce will take advantage of that as he does his seminars - eventually giving us enough inferences that we can postulate a better description of the situation.

Until then, we remain in experimental limbo. Given that fact, I personally choose to believe my experiences, and everyone else can do as they see fit.

dave

ou...Dave, now we're confounded!  then I noticed, life is like that.

what I notice on this thread and other threads is a stretching of the mind is taking place among many of us..an effort as it were...I think it's important to look at that factor that we are at the least putting our heads together, and who knows? maybe its a positive effort that will yield an answer to more than a few of us.

I'm reminded, in a broad sense of when we believed the world was flat. then I wonder when they got back from sailing I wonder if there were still some people in town who said oh that's BS...that they say the world is round, not flat.

seems logical that there were some who hung back, because, after all, it surely was not their experience to have sailed around the world.

now I could be wrong but here goes my thoughts: according to my belief system of a religious slant, JC has forgiven me my errors or sins. I assume that means my future and past sins or errors. So I am free to say this and expect forgiveness from my mates out there..you guys..JC also said "go and sin no more." as a budding medium, I could be that too, I admit the possibility, but I also say I have no motivation for that, nor intentions.

What does it really mean when it's said the truth will set you free? Did JC say this?
I don't know who said it, but I have witnessed time and again it is true. So I feel free to express myself, because I don't claim to belong to any thought system which does not produce that feeling that the truth is indeed setting me free.

It yields peace of mind, that I am not sinning. I am not in error. yet I will speak for none, just myself and hope it is enough, that I can share peace of mind. however I must go and get my OWN peace of mind and hold it by exploring our world, both nonphysical and physical. It's frustrating sometimes to wish to be a healing instrument of god and all that is happening is it seems you wind up typing on a computer and mentally masturbating is all it winds up being.

thats what I'm talking about, and I quote Bruce here, directly from his mouth and from his books "do your own soul searching and explorations and report back here what u discovered, in that way, at least we know you didn't read it out of a book, so there may be some factors to learn from explorers who use this method of retrieving, or partnered exploration, then there is a basis for comparison, and value in that comparison.

I hear voices from living and nonphysical folks. thank god not all the time and only if I am related to the sender through a bond of some sort, love, or family relationships mainly. I have my own life, I don't want to hear voices all of the time. seems some higher form of guidance is active to close down my space when I need time to myself to think and ponder. so I am safe from the looney bin in that way.
I am not able to say how it happens, that the brain is like a radio receiver? and that I can change the channel by my will? that is an idea but does not explain who and what we are, so confound it Dave! haha!

Don, your logic is pointing to a thought form you have, or a belief system you adhere to strongly, that it is morally wrong to contact a deceased person. This belief that it is morally wrong, is also associated with the fact you are a traditional Methodist minister.
Sometime ago it was decided that only certain pharisees could receive god inspiration to pass on to the flock.
But this does not jive with JC's words; you will all do miracles in my name as I do. I do see an opportunity to do healing work with abilities of mediumship, and that only bodes well for the masses as there is no reason to believe in illness if we lean on the teachings of JC.

So I say it is not necessarily morally wrong to be communicating with nonphysical beings, as even JC is nonphysical. He left the comforter here. what do you suppose the comforter is? its the body of Christ. What do you think the body is Christ is made up of?
why, lo and behold, the body of Christ is you and me and a bunch of other nonphysical beings who no longer have a body of flesh but still retain their status as individuals capable of bring forth messages of peace and hope and truth that will set us free.
we are the messengers of his word and the word can come through in many different ways in many different individuals.

I rarely talk this way, as I am a new ager, but I feel JC is personal savior to me, all who choose to study him, it is that he accepts us when we choose him. He is very much alive you guys, he did not die truly, he's just big enough to be able to see all of us at once and he can be anywhere popping up, as well, the HS grouping, (his words, holy spirit means whole spirit) they are also one with him with no ideas outside of his, so they can appear as they wish, in any guise if the purpose is to aid another soul into the light of who and what they really are.

preaching over. love you guys just as you are. hey, have to clarify I saw JC and Buddha are getting along over there ok, as well all religions mingle with each other peacefully as theres some truth everywhere you go. enemies make friends with each other on the other side quite easily.

Don't let it 'Throw you' Alysia.  Not one bit.
I am tired of this name calling 'ghetto' myself.
It is childish and lame.

You are correct. You do not have to prove a thing.
Not to me...not to anyone.

Whatever you say happens while you are Out of body *I* will take you at your word.
Why? Because I 'TRUST' you wholeheartedly.
I do not get a 'bad vibe' (lack of any term I can think of) from you EVER!
You have no agenda other then loving people.

All I get from you is GIVING.
So...you go on and be you.  Do not let anything throw you off your game.
People depend on you BE-ing you.  One of them is me.
This may be Bruce Moen's forum. He started it and cultivated it.
I am reading his books and learning a lot.
However, you are one of the MAIN reasons I even come here and post.
Don't forget that. I am sure others feel like I do about you as well.

I am also proud of you. You stand up to bullies.  You are fearless.  You are Alysia!

Just a poInt on note here, but I feel an important point. During my nde and the nde of others "EVERYTHING" over there operates on ESP .

ALAN

wow. I wonder if we can all heal this situation? I don't know have to think on it awhile and ask for a miracle, for Don. I do think he has a calling, therefore god is surely working in him as well as all of us. so we could offer a prayer:

Don

May all your hurt and anger you project on this board be transmuted into the peace of god and perfect evidence of PUL be expressed through you in your ministry.
Amen

now we go into war these days. but it's a war with ourselves to speak softly but carry a big stick perhaps.  we must look at this thread in this way; (opinions are valuable)

we can win the battle, but not the war.  my suggestion is a worthy one because it was set by the administrator, Bruce himself. If you read the guidelines, we are breaking every single rule. be that as it may, its done. heres how to end the battle.

stop calling this place a new age ghetto.

Effectively, we now have come to expect that we are indeed, guess what? a new age ghetto. Now every newbie comes, looking for whatever dinner we might have, they will read oh "its a new age ghetto" guess I don't want to be a part of the new age ghetto so I will not add my VALUABLE 2 cents worth of experience, because I will probably be attacked for this belief I have, this experience which I would love to share, if only someone would listen.

it has come to my attention by private contact, people would say, I have no one to confide my beliefs, which are new, due to an experience I had. It could be a retrieval, it could be an NDE, it could even be Juditha's divorce, where she has no one to talk to. whatever reason we end up communicating on this board, it should be a "safe" environment meaning another is not using another as a scapegoat, to project anger unto another group.

I notice Don has PUL. he came to Juditha's rescue on that thread. good for Don, however, reccomending she find another church other than spiritualist is not what Juditha needs to hear. she is what she is. and we are all in training, to learn more. my point. many paths, same god. god is not a vengeful god, humans are.
Don is in denial that the world is changing. we have channellers now! imagine that. Imagine every one becomes their own minister and no longer projects hatred upon another group who does have different beliefs and different behaviors.

Stay, go, I don't mind either way as the opposite opinion is good to hear once in awhile so long as its not rammed down your throat.

all I'm asking for is the cease and desist in name calling.  it would be the same exact request if someone were in a room with me and they shouted at me, I would certainly not allow myself to just accept their shouting. I can hear quite well. you don't need to raise your voice Don.

its for each of us to adhere to the guidelines and not act condescendingly simple because you have a degree or two. besides, when a person is angry, it's really hard for spirit to speak to them the truth that they might attain.

sum up, just knock off the name calling. we can go forward from there. who knows, we may be in for a miracle! I'm up for that.
thanks Dood for your thoughts.

I have been one of Don's biggest supporters, even after he stated, in the Mindfreak thread that he would not respond to my posts in general because he did not think my spiritual quest was a genuine one.  That cut me to the quick, as my mind/spirit are centered on my quest every day.

Yet this is a message board.  You present your point of view - backed up by your own experience and knowledge.  You go with the flow.  I like information and different points of view.  When Don said he could have stated x,y or z on my Tree of Life thread, but did not because he did not deem me a worthy seeker, I thought - too bad.  Many would have enjoyed hearing his take on things from scriptural knowledge. 

Even after that assault on me, I PM'd Don, and asked him to comment on the thread by Alan M. on Myers - as this researcher from the 1800s found a medium who also channeled some "living people" before Lenore Piper did.  Don declined to comment there, or to reply to my PM.  I did hold out the olive branch, despite having been hit, because I see him as a colleague on the board, and I try to ignore the personal stuff.

Some of the best discussions on this board have been heated ones.  I'm a bit tired of the tough love approach or jabs, but in the end - I'd rather share knowledge with Don as a frined than ask him to leave.  The barbs drew some blood, but I have a tough skin.

Those who operate from a system of pure logic, be th Socrates, Vulcans or our friend, have a belief system based on logic.  They of course might say that to not believe in logic is to have a belief system based on inanity.  Either way, it is the belief that we choose and stick too.  How difficult it must be for one who requires nonfalsifiable data to operate in Focus 27 (also called the Summerland).  If any thought can be instantly translated into fantasy/reality, you'd have to let go of more rigid belief systems.  Otherwise, you'd gravitate toward others who preferred to keep their feet firmly on the spiritual ground, rather than fly.

I say, have at thee Sir Don!  En garde!  I am always ready to play/engage.  Will I ask that insults not be thrown around (yeah, probably).  But with the mix of input from all posters, we will have a hell of a good time.

Matthew

I have grown tired of this board precisely for some of the reasons that I suspect that Don is growing tired of this board.  Its amazing to me how negative people have turned on Don when he is one of the most insightful, intelligent, well read, and open minded voices on this board.  I had planned on never coming back and never posting again but will briefly in defense of Don. 

I haven't read all of the posts on this thread (I'm at work) but a couple things stand out.  Old Dood and others are flipping out at Don characterizing the board as a new age ghetto.  Its a fair characterization, as on the whole if people don't read outside their line of thinking, then the site becomes a common belief system that is simply bought into - a group mentality that can be disconnected from reality.  At the end of the day, if we are all looking for greater understanding and truth about the afterlife, then we need to be able to think critically and from different perspectives.  Don has shown how some thinking, even in this thread, resembles a new age ghetto.

I have a couple requests before I lurk and probably leave the site for good.  One is please think critically and don't get bent out of shape if your pet idea (belief system) is being attacked.  Attacking a bad idea or a line of thought is not the same thing as attacking a person.  As a side note, Don is not a mean person - reference old posters like Chumley or Spitfire for actually mean people.

Secondly, I would request that people do more of what Don does - please attack bad ideas, ask for what grounds people are just saying things about.  I could think the afterlife involves a flying spaghetti monster, and post my essay on the reality of the afterlife as governed by the flying spaghetti monster, but it is meaningless unless there are reasons for these sentiments.  We are all interested in the afterlife - what this site needs more of is critical thinking and critical posts (like Don's), not less of them.

Good question, Vicky!

So tell us,please, Don. Have you tried any of the methods for access to the afterlife that Bruce recommends?

d