Don,

I watched about half of the first video, and I may watch further.  However, I have read up on the Scole experiments before. 

I am a firm believer in paranormal phenomenon.  I have posted here on the P.E.A.R. center at Princeton,(now defunct) whose sole purpose was to experiment in the area of psi and the effect of human will on random number generating machines - shielded from all known fraud or interference.  The results of those studies were, in my mind quite impressive.

I have no doubt that there may be gifted mediums and psychics out there.  Certain video taped readings done of George Anderson smacked of authenticity to me on a gut level, and I was told that there was no way he could have known prior to meeting the person he was to read who it would be to have done prior "research."

So, yes, I believe in psi, and in my heart that our consciousness goes on when we shed the physical body.  That being said, I have a problem with the parlor trick mentality these experiments evoke - and most importantly, the idea that we are looking only for physical verification (a ghostly apparation, a whilring table, etc.) as a method to verify that which is nonphysical.

Houdini reproduced almost all of the results of trance mediums in his day in darkened rooms he had set up.  It was his calling.  There are many illusionists who can give you absoultely convincing apparitions, materializations and the like.  While these tangible phenomenon make the gullible nod there heads and say "yes, yes, this is proof," I find it to be the least likely evidence.  Don, a single stage magician may or may not have the talents to debunk the illusions.  There are several accomplished ones today who likely would, if they were willing to participate with it.   Some are more talented than others.

Why would a discarnage materialize a coin or a flower?  Most sources, the best being Swedenborg, speak of the discarnate souls losing track of the physical world and its ways, rather than being connected to it.  To my mind, it would be infinitely more difficult for a discarnate spirit to materialize an object than to communicate to us in meditation or in a dream.  Or to open our eyes to a synchronicity of time or events.  These latter forms of communication are more subtle but more in line with the way non-physical communication of the mind works.

The writing on undeveloped film seemed like a patricularly dull trick to me.  If it was so easily accomplished, it should be a relatively common form of communication by now - sort of like EVP - an yet, we hear little to nothing about it in terms of common occult communication.  The film is rolled and tightly wound inside a container.  Tell me how, in any logical way, there can be elaborate drawings, etc. done from the nonphysical which would get impressed on the film without unwinding it? 

As to the last question, how can I believe some communications were real, when others may have been out and out fraud - I simply leave the door open that certain talents were at hand, and certain communications MAY have been genuine.  But clearly, there was an agenda here at play, and a desire to make their point across the board, possibly to the detriment of the truth.

Matthew

Heisenberg,

Regarding parlor tricks and the like - yes it is true, we all decide what evidence to accept or discard.  How then does one discern - this is the real question.  And as we have noted on this board, it usually comes down to more than just an intelectual process.  Sometimes your "gut" tells you, sometimes you just know. 

Although I am Jewish, I have a great respect for  (and resonate with )the New Testament and I am fairly well versed in certain areas.  A Jew for Jesus?  Possibly.  But I digress...

One passage in the NT discusses false prophets.  "By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?"

In essence, the passage asks one to couple the miracles of the false prophets or illusionists with their overall character.  I do find the Scole researchers to be a sincere bunch, with good character -  and if there were deception, I do not think that all would have to have been in on the deception - this actually enhances the sincerity of the overall project. 

The best proof of the continuation of consciousness is unfortunately done deep within each person, as they recognize that a truth has been revealed.  However, in the physical world, there are ways to try to unequivocally show there is persistence of consciousness or consciousness separate from physical life.  One such attempt is being arranged in a multi-center hospital study where many Emergency Rooms have agreed to put an agreed on writing and images on their ceilings where people most commonly have episodes of clinical death - after which they return to their bodies.

The scientists involved in this research are:  Dr. Peter Fenwick and Dr. Sam Parnia, of  Southampton General Hospital, in England.

A summary of the study:

"Parnia and his colleague, Dr Peter Fenwick, a consultant neurophysiologist at the Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, reason that if the patient really is having an out-of-body experience, this should be testable. First, a person floating above their body should be able to describe events that they can see while they are clinically dead that can be corroborated later. Secondly, the patient has a unique view of the hospital bed and could see objects that other people cannot.  Parnia has placed cards on the top of wardrobes, or hanging from the ceiling, in cardiac wards - a pink dog, for instance. 'These are not things the patient or the staff would associate with a hospital; they cannot see them and they do not know they are there,' he says... If we have someone who leaves their body, is able to identify the card we have left and report about events that happened in the resuscitation theatre which they could not have known about, then we would have to ask some serious questions about the science of consciousness,'  Fenwick says."

What is impressive in this research is that the hospitals and medical physicians involved all agreed to this controlled method of testing, to look, in an unbiased way on NDEs that occur and then report on the data - confirmatory or otherwise - for consciousness during clinical death. 

If confirmed, one will conclusively say that there is some documentation of conscious perception outside of the physical body during physical death.  This is not done in pitch black rooms with floating apparitions or parlor type backgrounds. 

By their fruits you will know them.  Yes Heisenberg, I agree with you - at some point you decide what to believe.  And though I consider myself to be open minded, I speak from my gut.  And at least part of the Scole "fruit" left a bad taste in my mouth.

I will research the rest since I am curious about the taste of others for this fruit.

M

Hello Don,

There isn't much I would add to what Matthew has already stated, eloquently I might add.  Just as change is a constant, so is uncertainty. That, in my opinion is simply the nature of evolving consciousness in which consciousness is ever exploring and interacting with that which arises.  Experiments such as these will most likely always produce elements of uncertainty because without that element the process of evolutionary growth would likely stagnate.  When uncertainly is present we will always have believers and nonbelievers and as has been stated, ultimately we each must decide. 

Exploring the possibilities, reflecting on them, even struggling with them to internalize meaning and making a choice is the process that comes from uncertainty. It's a process each of us must take a personal part in for individual spiritual growth to occur.  Strong evidence convincing someone to believe something only creates belief. The process has been eliminated.  Self-reflection is very much a part of personal progress.  Yet it seems much of the time people are still willing to believe what they are told without going through the process, so even if science were able to produce enough convincing evidence showing the existence of the afterlife, people would still need to go through the process of individual reflection and change in order to progress to conscious betterment.

As you know firsthand, mystical experience and the paranormal can be spectacular and life changing.  It is the personal events that drive us most significantly toward meaningful purpose and change.  Yet even having personal mystical interaction with the non-physical world can produce uncertainty while at the same time producing a certainty and drive/desire within us to learn, grow and progress spiritually.
 
Now I know I'm not saying anything you haven't already stated at one time or another in so many words.  And I know you have lots of common sense... well...maybe unless it involves something you get super excited about.    Then again, that's probably true of us all. 

Kathy

The Myers cross correspondences are very compelling data.  For those who don't know about it, in brief, Myers decided that if post-mortem communication to mediums was to be valid, one would have to prove that the medium was receiving messages of which he/she could not have known through the reading of a living person's mind.

It is said that Myers, upon passing, sent messages to several different mediums, but gave them messages related to the Classics (of which they were not aware).  Each message Myers provided post-mortem was supposedly meaningless in and of itself, but was  a single piece of a puzzle, which when put together, gave a clear message from the afterlife. 

Myers reasoned that this would be indisputable proof of survival.  Since mediums received these mini coded messages all over the world, and the code could only be cracked on assembling them together, he figured this would unequivocally prove that he survived physical death. 

An elegant method for showing survival. 

M

I only wish one of the objective scientists had been bold enough to bring in a flash light and turn it on during the communication.  Either one would see a figure dressed in black performing a trick, or the true paranormal nature would have been verified.  Admittedly, there would have been a loss of trust involved - not saying that is a good thing.

On what grounds were the researchers not allowed to use infrared cameras or night vision during the extreme darkness?  I mean come on, give me a break here - this technology was forbidden by the mediums, but why?  We have no evidence that the technology would have any deleterious effects on disincarnate spirits.  We do, however have evidence that a huckster would be caught in a flat out fraud, if the lights were turned on at a critical moment. 

I will view the entire series, and also address more comments, but the above questions are important ones.  When one is in the Monroe institute, or at one of Bruce's seminars, there is no prerequisite of total darkness to achieve communication with a loved one.   

Why would these mediums require utter darkness?  George Anderson, and a host of modern mediums, sit in well lit rooms and say they are in constant communication with our loved ones or that they surround the sitter, right there in broad daylight.  Is it a coincidence that the most marvelous phenomenon of ghostly images, levitations, etc occurred when this strict code of darkness was present?

My two cents.  But I don't recall Swedenborg mentioning the requirement of complete darkness or the banning of night vision or infrared technology.  There is no logical reason the researchers should have acquiesed to this request.

Does that invalidate every communication - from hours and hours of study?  Of course not.  But it speaks to me, and it is a real sticking point in the objective discussion.

Matthew

From Victor Zammit's site a possible explanation why trust is important in physical mediumship and the physical dangers to mediums:

' Eventually, it was the turn of one of the substitute sitters to be greeted. As Rohan (the materialised spirit) was about to take his hands in welcome, the man sprang forward and grabbed him!

Throwing his arms around the spirit figure, he held on to him tightly, shouting, "I've got you!" The sitter was obviously convinced he had captured the draped medium in the act of duplicity, masquerading as a spirit form.

As Rohan's figure quickly dematerialised there was a loud groan from Alec in the cabinet. Then carne a cry of pain as the ectoplasm swiftly returned to his body with the impact of a sledge-hammer.

The treacherous sitter fell dazed to the floor as the "solid" body he had held so tightly minutes before disappeared. I threw myself on him, desperately flailing with my hands, sobbing: "Oh don't! You'll kill my husband! You fool, you'll kill him!"

The man looked up at me, his eyes wide, terrified. The realisation dawned on him it had not been the medium he had grasped, but what it purported to be, a fully materialised spirit form.

Meanwhile the second impostor, taking advantage of the commotion that ensued, rushed to the window and pulled aside the closed curtains, having previously tampered with them during the "meditation" session earlier. This revealed his confederates outside the window. They had a battery of cameras focused on the seance room, on the cabinet in particular.

Lenses immediately clicked furiously as flash bulbs exploded. I glanced frantically in the cabinet's direction, and realised with profound relief that our guides were doing all in their power to protect their medium. They had swathed the curtains around Alec, completely enveloping him so that he was immune to the blinding flashes of light being so ruthlessly directed at him.

I was utterly bewildered and sick with dread for Alec, knowing what he must have suffered by the sudden impact of the returning ectoplasm. It all happened so quickly everybody was stunned.

The two journalists were the first to recover. They made a dash for the door in a bid to escape, but my niece Phyllis and her husband, Trevor, followed close on their heels in hot pursuit. One chose the kitchen exit. Trevor rescued him from the clutches of the dog who added its services in intercepting the fleeing man. The other ran wildly down the passage and was cornered by a very irate Phyllis and several male sitters in the lounge. This, to his chagrin, he found securely locked. Escape was impossible. All arrogance deserted him. He cringed apologetically.

"You tried to kill my uncle," Phyllis raged. "Why? Did you think he was a fake?" When the man did not answer,

Phyllis went on angrily, "Now you know he isn't." In disgust she told him to leave and take his friend with him. Two very frightened men, sobered by what they had seen, ran off into the night to join their confederates in a waiting car parked some distance down the street.

When Alec came out of trance he was patently very ill. He had a severe pain which persisted for some weeks in his solar plexus. A doctor was called. He treated Alec weekly for many months. Rohan, too, suffered adverse effects and needed, we were told by the scientist, a period of recuperation.

There was a sequel to this unhappy encounter. A short time after the "exposure", Alec and I were sitting in conversation with a doctor friend when my husband stopped speaking in mid sentence and was entranced. Alec's eyes closed, his face became relaxed. A soft baritone voice announced, "Rohan."

"I have come to tell you," he said, "that greater care must be taken of the medium. If there should be a repetition of the accident which took place a few weeks ago we will not be able to protect the medium as we then did. It was fortunate it was I who was materialised at the time. I knew what to do and was able to take the full shock of the encounter. By the time it reached the medium it was less severe. But I doubt that I shall be able to do this again. Take care!" I thanked Rohan and promised it would never occur again if it was humanly possible to avoid such a catastrophe. I then raised a point which had been worrying me.

"Rohan, what about all those photographs they took and are going to publish?" I asked.

"Do not worry about that," he said. "We have made certain all the films will be blank."

So it turned out to be. The magazine had promised readers in a previous issue it would give full photo coverage to the "exposure" of Alec's mediumship. These pictures never appeared. Obviously there were no photographs to print.

When Vidie heard how the exchange of seats had been engineered she was very upset and reacted in her typical outspoken manner. She wrote a letter to the man who had originally secured the two seats. "Herewith your 30 pieces of silver!" were among her words. The Biblical inference was appropriate and, she hoped, humiliating to the perpetrator of such shameful treachery.

I noticed a great change in Alec after the exposure attempt. His health was not as robust as before. Something seemed to have gone out of him. He slowed down considerably. Alec had always been such an energetic person, constantly looking for things to do about the home. Now everything seemed to be an effort.

Vidie thought a trip to Britain might help Alec, and restore his zest for living. In May 1962 we accompanied her to the United Kingdom. Alec did not look at all well. I decided that as soon as we reached Cardiff he should see our doctor and have a check-up.
We visited Peggy, our dear pianist friend of yore, and spent happy hours chatting of the old days.

After we left her, and were on our way to visit Alec's brother I noticed that Alec's driving was very erratic. He seemed to have difficulty keeping the car on a straight course. Alec managed to negotiate the vehicle through Cardiff's busy streets without mishap. We were driving slowly along a quiet road where his brother lived when the car suddenly swerved violently and landed on the pavement, where it came to a halt. Alec was slumped in his seat looking very strange.

"I can't feel anything down my right side," he gasped. "My right leg and arm are numb." His speech was slightly slurred.

Fortunately my brother-in-law, anticipating our arrival, was waiting by his gate. He saw the mishap take place and quickly ran to give assistance. Moving Alec into the passenger seat, he got behind the wheel and took us to his house. He then drove us back to an aunt's home. Alec refused to allow a doctor to be called. He did not wish to disturb the household. By then, it was midnight.

The doctor came early next morning and told me he would get my husband to hospital at once. As we were in Cardiff where all our old healing circle members lived, I felt Alec would be better at home receiving treatment from them. The doctor reluctantly agreed, provided Alec was watched very carefully.

Alec was sedated for five days. When the doctor made another examination he was very surprised at the improvement in my husband's condition. But Alec continued to make good progress. We remained in Cardiff for a further four weeks. Vidie came down to drive us back to London.

The sea air and plenty of rest on our return trip did Alec a lot of good. He seemed very much better. When we arrived in Durban to stay with our children they were dismayed at the change in their father.

It took two years before he was anything like his old self again.

Once home, we gave occasional circles, but only for immediate friends, not the public. Alec's confidence in sitters had been sadly shaken. He could never again be completely relaxed and at ease as in the days before the seance room betrayal. His health was not as good as previously. Spirit friends had difficulty in materialising.

When we first sat nothing happened, but we were asked to be patient as there would have to be a period of redevelopment. There did not seem to be enough power for materialisations to form completely, or as strongly, as before. Sometimes they could not build to their proper height. On other occasions only portions of their figures took shape, perhaps an arm, leg or face, unrecognisable in incompleteness. When a form did build fully there would be a long wait until the next materialisation. Before the incident, when one spirit form returned to the cabinet another would step out almost immediately.

'

Heisenberg,

I am open to the idea of real contact, but every contact I have had with the other side, and many verified cases of contact, leave me with no doubt that the danger stated in your passage is - well - how shall I say this nicely?  - overstated if not completely made up.

I have seen sincere mediums give readings where they were speaking directly to and through a deceased loved one, in the daylight and although there was no deliberate materialization of an object, there was no danger implied or precautions taken to the medium.

Admittedly, the entire concept of people giving up their vocal cords or body for a spirit to "enter,"  or use already sets a bad precedent, as it implies a loss of control from the side of the living, and almost invites fraud, misinterpreted psi, etc (if real). 

Where was the documentation from the alleged debunkers after this incident?  Without more information we are listening to heresay and tall tales from a biased source.  Campfire stuff. 

Seances first entered the modern world in the mid 1700s from written records, and peaked with the spiritualist movement in the 1800s.  However, as hucksterism spread, there were several large public investigations which debunked many illusionists of that time in a convincing manner: (from an article on the seance)

" During the latter half of the 19th century, a number of Spiritualist mediums began to advocate the use of specialized tools for conducting séances, particularly in leader-assisted sessions conducted in darkened rooms. "Spirit trumpets" were horn-shaped speaking tubes that were said to magnify the whispered voices of spirits to audible range. "Spirit slates" consisted of two chalkboards bound together that, when opened, were said to reveal messages written by spirits. "Séance tables" were special light-weight tables which were said to rotate, float, or levitate when spirits were present. "Spirit cabinets" were portable closets into which mediums were placed, often bound with ropes, in order to prevent them from manipulating the various aforementioned tools.
The exposure of supposed mediums whose use of séance tools derived from the techniques of stage magic has been disturbing to many believers in spirit communication. In particular, the 1870s exposures of the Davenport Brothers as illusionists and the 1887 report of the Seybert Commission brought an end to the first historic phase of Spiritualism. Stage magicians like John Neville Maskelyne and Harry Houdini made a side-line of exposing fraudulent mediums during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 1976, M. Lamar Keene described deceptive techniques that he himself had used in séances; however, in the same book, Keene also stated that he still had a firm belief in God, life after death, ESP, and other psychic phenomena.
The exposures of fraud by tool-using mediums have had two divergent results: Skeptics have used historic exposures as a frame through which to view all spirit mediumship as inherently fraudulent, while believers have tended to eliminate the use of tools but continued to practice mediumship in full confidence of its spiritual value to them."

The Seybert Commission was a group of faculty at the University of Pennsylvania who in 1884-1887 investigated a number of respected spiritualist mediums, uncovering fraud or suspected fraud in every case that they examined.

Anyone who puts value in the story proposed rather one-sidedly about the dangers of 18th century ectoplasm causing injury to a medium, is entering into a kind of belief system in a process that is dictated to us solely by the medium (guru), and thus a matter of belief rather than a "known" truth.  While I don't completely discount discarnate ghostly hands and tables levitating, I have found a trove of the same feats described in Scole used by illusionists since around the 1800s, but rarely before then.  I have also seen reports of mediums who were unafraid to give readings out in the light.  Now why do you suppose that is?

Why do people consider that they need to have the nonphysical materialize in the physical to be their proof of life after death?  It makes far more sense to me that knowledge of what could only have been known by the deceased or the return of a temporarily deceased person (NDE), would be the best evidence of the continuation of consciousness. 

At the height of the spiritualist movement, large numbers of mediums and illusionists were unmasked as frauds in a most telling way - sort of like Toto going behind the curtain in the movie The Wizard of Oz to find the man behind the smoke and mirrors.  Houdini himself did this many times, and wrote at least two texts on this.

Just as some on this thread ask for us to examine the Scole data in more detail, it is incumbent on us to examine the past, the notable tricks that were debunked over a century ago by others.  Examples of this can be found with relative ease (Houdini's books are still available).  Or on the web, articles such as;

http://www.prairieghosts.com/seance2.html

Either way, I guess we decide what is real to us, as is always the case. 

Matthew

Mathew-

thanks for the info on the Seybart Commission, The first point I'd like to make is that I don't think you'll find someone who believes that there are genuine mediums who does'nt also believe that there are fraudulent mediums (maybe even the majority). But just as there are dishonest used car salesmen there may be honest ones we can still buy cars from !

You don't seem to draw a distinction between physical and mental mediumship. Mental mediumship obviously would'nt need the safeguards considered necessary in physical mediumship. I do find physical mediumship especially compelling though because with the mental variety there are alternative explanations such as 'cold' reading, 'hot' reading, rater bias, lucky guesses etc etc. meaning that elaborate protocols and complex statistics need to be invoked. With the physical variety there is none of that : we have two choices : paranormality or fake. This means that if we can rule out fake logically it must be paranormal (perhaps 'super-psi but thats another matter ...).

I gave the the Alex Harris example ( I could have used others such as Helen Duncan's death or David Thompson's injury ) to give a general  indication why certain protocols might possibly be necessary in a physical seance for those who might not know. It may or may not be true but its something to consider- the only way to test it empirically is to take some physical mediums and expose them to possible harm- not happening soon !

I think we are both on the same page in so far as we both want to know if fraud is taking place- although I think that fraud is not the best explanation where you think that it is . One thing I would say is that because these events are contemporary, unlike cases from 100+ years ago, we can question parties involved in the here and now. For example I have spoken to people who have attended David Thompson seances for example who can find no evidence of fraud. But I intend to stay open-minded.

D