We often think of the afterlife as consisting of every possible environment. Yet in fact the range of habitats seems to be somewhat limited. If we can judge by reports -- both from near-death experiencers and mediums -- the most common environment, overwhelmingly, is a garden. Meadows and fields are also frequently reported. Houses are usually described as occupying large plots, rather than being built close together. Cities do make an appearance, but they are encountered far less often than rustic environments.
Completely absent, as far as I can tell, is the desert. I know of no NDEs or channeled information suggesting that discarnate souls live in desert conditions -- despite the fact that, on earth, there are many people who love the desert and wouldn't live anywhere else.
Perhaps a more surprising omission is the ocean. Certainly for living people, the ocean exerts an undeniable fascination. Herman Melville took note of this in the famous opening pages of Moby-Dick.
If they but knew it, almost all men in their degree, some time or other, cherish very nearly the same feelings towards the ocean with me.
There now is your insular city of the Manhattoes, belted round by wharves as Indian isles by coral reefs -- commerce surrounds it with her surf. Right and left, the streets take you waterward. Its extreme down-town is the battery, where that noble mole is washed by waves, and cooled by breezes, which a few hours previous were out of sight of land. Look at the crowds of water-gazers there.
Circumambulate the city of a dreamy Sabbath afternoon. Go from Corlears Hook to Coenties Slip, and from thence, by Whitehall northward. What do you see? -- Posted like silent sentinels all around the town, stand thousands upon thousands of mortal men fixed in ocean reveries. Some leaning against the spiles; some seated upon the pier-heads; some looking over the bulwarks of ships from China; some high aloft in the rigging, as if striving to get a still better seaward peep. But these are all landsmen; of week days pent up in lath and plaster -- tied to counters, nailed to benches, clinched to desks. How then is this? Are the green fields gone? What do they here?
But look! here come more crowds, pacing straight for the water, and seemingly bound for a dive. Strange! Nothing will content them but the extremest limit of the land; loitering under the shady lee of yonder warehouses will not suffice. No. They must get just as nigh the water as they possibly can without falling in. And there they stand -- miles of them -- leagues. Inlanders all, they come from lanes and alleys, streets and avenues, -- north, east, south, and west. Yet here they all unite. Tell me, does the magnetic virtue of the needles of the compasses of all those ships attract them thither?
Many relaxation exercises ask you to imagine yourself lying on a beach and listening to the gentle rhythm of the surf. It's clear that in many people's minds the seashore is closely associated with bliss. Personally, if I were asked to describe an ideal paradise environment, I would think of an unspoiled stretch of tropical shoreline, the kind of spot that might be found in Hawaii or Tahiti.
Yet I know of no NDEs that take place on the beach or near an ocean. The same is true of channeled communications. In fact, in Helen Greaves' channeled book Testimony of Light, the communicator explicitly says at one point that while she has found a variety of delightful locales in the afterlife, she has not seen the sea. At that point her guide allows her to visit the ocean on earth -- which seems to suggest that this particular environment cannot be found in the afterlife. Lakes and streams are not infrequently reported, but as far as I know, the ocean never is.
If the various accounts of the afterlife were purely the product of fantasy, one might reasonably expect some of those fantasies to include the desert or the ocean. As far as I can tell, none of them do. Perhaps this argues that there is an underlying reality to these reports.
This still leaves the question of why the desert and the sea have been omitted from the geography of the next world. The only tentative answer I can suggest is that both environments involve wide open spaces, and perhaps in a world consisting of consensual thought forms, it is simply not possible to have a great deal of open, essentially undeveloped space. Perhaps the natural tendency is for people's imaginative projections to fill up that space with life and activity, so that a vast expanse of sparsely vegetated land or a huge stretch of open water cannot be established, or at least cannot be maintained for long.
Whatever the reason, it's surprising to think that there could be any limitations on environments constructed out of the raw material of thought.
Michael, there are no limitations on environments. Every type of environment is catered for. Why would it be otherwise?
Not only have I have read of innumerable types of conditions existing in the Spirit World but in my own questioning of various spiritual teachers over the years I have found a consistency of teachings regarding life in the spiritual dimensions.
The closer-to-the-earth communicators are more likely to find very similar conditions to the earth so much so that very often people don't realise they have 'died'.
It is all a matter of degree.
There are deserts and oceans as there are arctic lands - they are all states of consciousness.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 13, 2010 at 05:02 PM
I have often been to the beach in my crossings-over. My beloved and I stay there, sometimes, in a small place where we're all alone (pet-free environment, lol).
Since I have every reason to believe firmly that animals cross into Spirit, there would surely have to be the range of environments they would live in.
I would suggest that it's not a matter of the desert or ocean (or mountains, or impenetrable jungle) not being there, as simply not being the places people choose to live. And there's a comfort in familiarity, so maybe it's not surprising that NDEs - just dipping your toe in, if you like - don't report the wild, remote places.
Meadows, woods and rivers form the backdrop of my beloved's home in Spirit, for certain. The environment is reminiscent of his home in France. It will certainly suit me when I get to stay permanently ... one thing I do not fancy is being stuck in anything like the Australian landscape over there!
Posted by: Louise | March 13, 2010 at 07:54 PM
http://www.adcrf.org/viji_adc.htm
An NDE report from an Arab that involves the a sea motif.
Though you have made an interesting observation, MP, I suspect that there may be some cultural effect occurring.
Black Elk apparently started his career as a medicine man by having what appears to have been an NDE when he was very ill with swollen ankles and other serious symptoms. His parents reported to him afterwards that he been unconscious for 12 days.
He saw and traveled to an isolated mountain where there were elders ("grandfathers") and horses and other very "Indian" motifs.
You can google the account pretty easily. It appears in the book "Black Elk Speaks"
Posted by: Erich | March 13, 2010 at 09:28 PM
http://www.welcomehome.org/rainbow/prophecy/BlackElk.html
Bizarre by our cultural standards, but has some classic features; esp the return to his physical body where he sees his parents looking over a sick boy that he recognizes to be himself.
Posted by: Erich | March 13, 2010 at 09:36 PM
"Michael, there are no limitations on environments. Every type of environment is catered for."
Maybe, but I don't recall seeing the desert or seashore mentioned in any NDEs or channeled accounts. Actually I don't think I've read accounts of jungles or dense forests, either.
"An NDE report from an Arab that involves the a sea motif."
Thanks for the link. It seems to me, though, that this NDEr simply reported flying over the ocean, which is different from perceiving the beach as an environment where people are living.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 13, 2010 at 10:26 PM
Leslie Flint's direct voice mediumship has some spirits talking about living by the sea, one spirit communication tape I recall being of a Sea Captain who talked about taking little kids out daily for ship rides on the ocean, in his afterlife realm.
But, of course, I'm not entirely convinced of Leslie Flint's tapes. There's arguments for and against the authenticity.
Posted by: Eteponge | March 13, 2010 at 10:46 PM
My personal experiences have been beautiful lakes beyond anything imaginable in this world. Forests so beautiful that cannot be described with mere words. Colors that we don’t have a name for. Nothing was dead or dying neither the grass or trees just beautiful colors. The neat thing I would fly or float and in this life I have not been fond of heights.
As far as the desert I have spent 20 years riding the desert on a motorized trail bike and I think I would miss it on the other side. I don’t think the other dimensions are any more of an illusion then the material world. It is just less dense than this world and easier molded by our mental thoughts. The synonyms for illusion and likewise the term illusion do not accurately describe this world or these other dimensions.
I know it is popular to call these other worlds and even this world an illusion but what is popular is not always valid. Maybe the terms transient or temporal describe these phenomena we call astral and physical matter. Phenomena are not an illusion, as they exist as serial experiences therefore they exist in time.
Rather than the term illusion maybe a better term would be temporal or transient expressions.
“But, of course, I'm not entirely convinced of Leslie Flint's tapes. There's arguments for and against the authenticity.”
One of the most tested mediums ever and never found to be invalid in any way shape or form. I am interested in reading any arguments against the authenticity if you have those links or books. I know many that tested him left with a lack of understanding from where the voices came from but to my knowledge no one ever found him to be a fraud.
Posted by: william | March 13, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Eteponge: But, of course, I'm not entirely convinced of Leslie Flint's tapes. There's arguments for and against the authenticity.
Did you ever sit with Leslie Flint?
I did. I sat at least once a month, and sometimes more frequently, over a period of ten years.
I also tape recorded every session and there is no doubt as to their authenticity.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 14, 2010 at 12:55 AM
Let me clear up something, I'm *very* interested in the Leslie Flint tapes. There is stuff in there that clears up spirit communication paradoxes that have bothered me for quite awhile.
Such as when Leslie Flint's young guide Mickey explains WHY some people on the other side say there is no eating, smoking, drinking, sex, reincarnation, etc, on the other side, and that people over there need to kick those habits and addictions, and yet other spirit sources directly *contradict* that and say that they *do exist* and are permissible. A spirit communication paradox.
Leslie's guide however mentions in the tapes that the reason for this is because people are always communicating with spirits in different spheres, where the rules are different. Which clears up the apparent paradox.
In one sphere for example, Reincarnation may be an option for those spirits, whereas in another sphere, it is not.
In one sphere, eating, smoking, drinking, sex, etc, may not be possible, and spirits there will need to kick those habits and addictions, but in another sphere, they are permissible and exist. Etc. That clears up why spirit communication is so contradictory.
(I once had a medium tap into a great uncle of mine, and when I asked for an identifier from him, he said the uncle was making moonshine for himself and drinking it recreationally on the other side. In life, this uncle was a moonshine maker and a huge alcoholic. For example. It was veridical. This contradicts medium sources that claim no alcohol drinking on the other side.)
Also, the O'Reilly tape is the most convincing Leslie Flint recording of all to me. The guy honestly sounds like how a soldier from that era would sound, and he retains his emotions, unique personality, gets angry easy, cusses up a storm at various points, talks about how he has nothing in common with his family when they asked about them, and that in his afterlife he has "nothing to do with those sorry blokes". It just screams REAL to me.
Some of the other voices in the Flint tapes, like the Scottish woman who haunted a house, are very different from one another, showing they are from unique individuals, although many others sound very similar. (I've heard this is due to the materialized spirit voice box or something.)
The main skeptical objection I have heard regarding Leslie Flint's recordings, is that *many* of the voices on the tapes sound either the same or *very* similar to one another (with some very notable exceptions like I mentioned). And, I'm not sure if they ever authenticated the existence of any of the spirits who came through who were not famous ones.
That's really the only main skeptical objection I've read, the voices sounding too similar to one another, and some other claims of voices like Ghandi's not matching his real voice (which was recorded during his lifetime).
That's really about all I know regarding skeptical objections.
And I'm just being cautious overall due to the history of physical and direct voice mediumship being even more problematic with fraud than mental mediumship.
But I am very intrigued by Leslie Flint and the content of the messages.
Posted by: Eteponge | March 14, 2010 at 02:28 AM
Perhaps the afterlife oceans are reserved for cetacean souls?
Posted by: Ben | March 14, 2010 at 05:33 AM
For me, Leslie Flint's behaviour strongly suggest he was a fraud.
THE RESULT OF THE PRIZE OFFER TO PHYSICAL MEDIUMS
IN May 1947, a group of S.P.R. members interested in the investigation of physical phenomena decided to subscribe to an award of £250, to be given to the first medium able and willing to demonstrate supernormal physical effects. The offer closed on December 31st 1947.
The Council of the Society very kindly agreed to lend the services of their Research Officer as final arbiter of the genuineness of the phenomena, and to allow their seance room and infra-red telsecope to be used for the purposes of the investigation. The Council must not, however, be held responsible for any opinions expressed in the following account, which is in fact the report of an entirely independent and private investigation.
A notice of the prize offer appeared in the Journal for June-July 1947, and wide publicity was given to the matter in the psychic press.[1]
[1]Notices appeared in Light, Prediction, Psychic Truth, Psychic News and The Journal of Experimental Metaphysics.
Representatives of several spiritualist institutions who employ mediums (such as the London Spiritualist Alliance, the Marylebone Spiritualist Association and the Institute of Paranormal Psychology) were notified by letter.
Various prominent mediums were approached personally.
In spite of this widespread appeal, by the time the closing date arrived only three mediums had responded, and none had succeeded in producing any phenomena.
This result lends strong support to the arguments of those persons who contend that the claims of contemporary physical mediums and their supporters are founded upon fraud and malobservation. It cannot be argued that the test prevented the phenomena, since the mediums were allowed to sit uncontrolled and in their own conditions. It really seems as if the presence of the infra-red telescope, which obviates the cruder types of fraud, puts paid to the mediums' whole performance.
It is instructive to note the reasons given by some prominent mediums for declining to take up the offer.
Mrs Estelle Roberts (clairvoyante and direct voice medium) wrote : " I am not interested in your offer of a prize for any demonstration of what I believe to be a religious belief."
Mr Ronald Strong (direct voice and materialisation) and Mr Charles Basham (materialisation) both appeared to agree to investigation, but although frequently prompted, neither was ever able to fix a date.
Mr Ronald Cockersell (direct voice and materialisation) said he was not interested in convincing S.P.R. investigators. Genuine phenomena could not be guaranteed like " a hen laying an egg ".
Arnold Clare (direct voice) said he had periods when he could get no phenomena, and we had asked him at such a time.
Hunter Selkirk and Alec Harris (materialisation) did not reply to our letters.
Leslie Flint (direct voice) had to think it over, but never came to a decision.
Mrs Helen Duncan (materialisation) was very definite in her refusal, •saying that she would not sit at the S.P.R., " for a million ".
Arthur Phillips (materialisation) was considering the offer when he was exposed by other investigators, who captured a false beard. ( See Psychic News 2 August 1947.)
As mentioned in the interim announcement in the September Journal, Mr Frank Allen, an apport medium, was the first to take up the offer.
On 19 May 1947 the Research Officer was present at Mr Allen's house circle, at which, during periods of complete darkness, " apports " of flowers were obtained. The only noteworthy feature of the sitting was that towards the end, Mrs Davies, wife of the medium's manager, remarked that Mr X was the only sitter who had not received any flowers, and suggested to a neighbour that she let him have some of hers. This incident took place before the " guide " announced that there would be no more flowers.
On 28 May, Mr Allen came to the S.P.R. accompanied by three friends. Before entering the seance room they were asked to step out of their own clothes into garments prepared by the investigators. In these circum-stances no " apports " were produced, and an offer of further sittings was not taken up.
After a great deal of persuasion and negotiation on the part of an enthusiastic member of the Society, Mrs D. M. Seccombe, a direct voice medium, was prevailed upon to give us some sittings. To the first of these, on 25 August 1947, the medium came unaccompanied. She went into an alleged, trance and her " control " spoke, but there was no direct voice and no physical effects were produced. The only point of interest was that the medium was seen (through the telescope) to lean over and whisper behind thejiecks of adjacent sitters. The speeches made by the " controls " were childish and without any evidential value. Mrs Seccombe came on three other occasions, (28 August, 30 October and 1 November) each time accompanied by some of her own friends, but no physical phenomena occurred. The medium's friends said they could see various spirit lights and luminous shapes which were not seen by the rest of the sitters. The telescope was switched off at times to make sure that it was not the cause of the lack of phenomena.
The third medium, Mr William Roy, after a preliminary visit to inspect the infra-red telescope, came for a sitting on 13 October 1947.. He was to bring with him his own circle of sitters, but on the day of the sitting he informed us that they declined to accompany him. Mr Roy went into an alleged trance and the " control " spoke, but no physical phenomena occurred. Mr Roy declared himself satisfied with the conditions at the time, and agreed to come again a fortnight later. However, he later cancelled this appointment, on the plea of another engagement, and failed to give an alternative date. On 12 December he was reminded by letter that the offer closed on 31 December. He replied that neither time-limits nor Prize Money interested him, but gave one to understand that he might offer himself to the S.P.R. for investigation in 1948.
What a pity.
Posted by: Vitor | March 14, 2010 at 05:38 AM
"For me, Leslie Flint's behaviour strongly suggest he was a fraud.
THE RESULT OF THE PRIZE OFFER TO PHYSICAL MEDIUMS...."
Eh??? Flint was officially tested by Brigadier Roy Firebrace, chief SPR research officer, at about this time. Famously the infra red equipment failed without Flint knowing about it and the volume of the voice phenomena then immediately doubled. I suspect this prize may have had Randiesque strings attached to it hence the shortage of takers.
Posted by: MickeyD | March 14, 2010 at 07:22 AM
Vitor: Why do I get this sense of Déjà vu?
We have been down this road before!
Accusing mediums of fraud because they wouldn't agree to an SPR challenge is patently ludicrous. Surely you can see that?
As for William Roy he was exposed as a blatant fraud by Maurice Barbanell then editor of a psychic newspaper. Roy subsequently sold his story to a Sunday newspaper.
I have published the full story on a Spiritualist website.
Also the SPR do not express a corporate opinion so any tests done under their control or their nominees would be a complete waste of time.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 14, 2010 at 08:36 AM
"I suspect this prize may have had Randiesque strings attached to it hence the shortage of takers."
Exactly! That seems obvious by the wording of the debunker's "offer."
Posted by: Lisa | March 14, 2010 at 08:43 AM
is because people are always communicating with spirits in different spheres, where the rules are different. Which clears up the apparent paradox.
In one sphere for example, Reincarnation may be an option for those spirits, whereas in another sphere, it is not.
Wow spiritual MultiVerses.
Posted by: -Marty | March 14, 2010 at 09:14 AM
This reminds me of my recent ''observation'' that I rarely dream of using a computer; i asked someone from an older generation (but still young): she could not remember any dreams with digital elements. Same with driving driving vehicles (though she had had a dream in which she was driving a bicycle: curious though, cause she - having a balance disorder - cannot drive bicycles)...
Posted by: fedde | March 14, 2010 at 11:07 AM
just asked my sister (a teen). She has had at least one, which, as she reports, had huge emotional impact on her. (As did some of my ''digital'' dreams - i believe that one of them was precognitive (it actually involved both a cell phone and the computer).
I'm not suggesting NDE's are hallucinatory - but i would suggest that our human mind seems to pick up on certain things in different ways (and i feel there might be a delay in picking up dream themes: the next generations, i suppose, will dream more of cars, trains, computers and cell phones)...
Posted by: fedde | March 14, 2010 at 11:13 AM
In Glimpses of the Next State Admiral W Usborne Moore tells of one of the many seances he attended in which he met a spirit named McBlin, an engineer who had drowned in Lake Erie. The Admiral asked him, "What are you doing now?" McBlin replied, "Oh, we have shops over there. I am doing much the same sort of work." Moore said, "But what will I do when my time comes to pass over? I am a sailor. You have got no sea." McBlin: "Have you ever been over here?" Moore: "No." McBlin: "Well how do you know? I tell you there is a replica of everything on earth."
Posted by: W Vogt | March 14, 2010 at 11:53 AM
Famously the infra red equipment failed without Flint knowing about it and the volume of the voice phenomena then immediately doubled.
What is the source for this?
Posted by: Vitor | March 14, 2010 at 12:43 PM
"Famously the infra red equipment failed without Flint knowing about it and the volume of the voice phenomena then immediately doubled."
"What is the source for this?"
P236 Of Prof David Fontana's book "Is there an Afterlife" is the only solid source I could point to at this time though I have seen this at several other places, including the the relevant SPR Journal which I don't have access to at his time.
Posted by: MickeyD | March 14, 2010 at 01:16 PM
"In one sphere, eating, smoking, drinking, sex, etc, may not be possible, and spirits there will need to kick those habits and addictions, but in another sphere, they are permissible and exist. Etc. That clears up why spirit communication is so contradictory."
This tells some very valuable lessons about subjectivity and difference amongst us. a Tibetan Buddhist may prescribe to an environment devoid of stimuli, and then insist that it is the "one, and only" path in the afterlife, much to the confusion of people on Earth.
Whereas personally, I insist on an environment with the full apparatus of senses. I have enough self-control in this life not to be an addict to anything. I won't be an addict over there.
Re: Where are Oceans and Deserts?
There are still unanswered questions. For one thing, are there weather effects in an afterlife? Is there chaos like on Earth? (tides, waves, destruction). Oceans precede chaos. They are also habitats for certain creatures that must live in water to gain oxygen. Obviously, creatures do not breath in the afterlife plane. Or do they?
I think lines must blur, and there must be hybrid environments where there are still Earth-like conditions. There may be oceans full of sea-creatures, with physical bodies, as perhaps their energy is not powerful enough to exist with omnipotent energy-bodies.
We're actually looking at an ocean (pardon the confusing terminology) of multiverses. Countless worlds and environments, each with different effects on your 'etheric' body, with planes ranging from formless to harsh and severe.
In Life in the World Unseen (authenticity: unknown, but compelling) a desert is described during Borgia's trip en route to hell. In this desert the planes and flowers made way for rocks and stone and a sense of malaisement.
Here in 'this' life, I'm into rock-music. I went to film school, and am into film-making that portrays all parts of life. Sometimes you'll see me hanging out in a club full of people wearing black leather, spikes, white makeup and fake vampire teeth. The fact is if I'm in a world that is only sunshine and flowers, I am eventually going to say "Fuck this place" and go off seeking danger and excitement. I am 99% sure I wouldn't be alone with these feelings, which makes me 99% sure there is a diverse array of environments besides just sunny fields.
- RE: Leslie Flint authenticity
Leslie's tapes provide, to me, the absolute clearest definitions of an afterlife ever to be placed on audiotape or paper. I think it's plain stupid to ignore everything authentic about him based on his inability to do a stage performance for the SPR back in 1947. We don't know the politics back then, or what Randi-sorts were pushing their agendas around in that organization.
And if Leslie were a fraud, whatever, move on. You can't put all afterlife evidence on one source anyway. Go watch a few episodes of "Psychic Detectives" and you'll see mediums with powers just as astonishing.
Posted by: Cyrus | March 14, 2010 at 01:39 PM
"You have got no sea." McBlin: "Have you ever been over here?" Moore: "No." McBlin: "Well how do you know? I tell you there is a replica of everything on earth." - W Vogt
--------------------------------------------
Finally, something that makes sense to me. This side, the physical universe, is a holographic projection from the Spiritual Universe - the holographic film from which our universe derives its reality. Everything that exists here exists there. How do I know this is true? Because about 1/3 of people who have had a Near Death Experience describe their experiences in terms that can only be called "holographic."
excerpt from an Interview with Dr. Brian Greene, PhD physicist at Columbia University and author of The Elegant Universe and Fabric of the Cosmos:
"In the final chapter of your book, you suggest that the world may be a hologram. That sounds very Matrix-like."
"It's a very speculative idea that seems to, strangely enough, naturally emerge from string theory. Basically, the fundamental laws of the universe don't really operate in the environment around us. They may operate on sort of a distant bounding surface and give rise to the familiar world that we experience in much the same way that a thin piece of plastic, when illuminated correctly—if it's a hologram—can yield a three-dimensional image.
It might be that the deep laws are more like the thin piece of plastic existing on a thin bounding surface. Everything we know might be akin to a holographic projection of those distant laws."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/03/0326_040326_briangreene.html
------------------------------------------
Excerpt from The Universe as a Hologram:
"A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser. To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film. When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears." http://www.earthportals.com/hologram.html
Posted by: Art | March 14, 2010 at 02:03 PM
Mickey,
don't you think too suspicious that Leslie Flint get better results only when the infra red equipament failed? What makes impossible that Leslie Flint had himself damage the equipament?
Posted by: Vitor | March 14, 2010 at 02:14 PM
>>Mickey,
don't you think too suspicious that Leslie Flint get better results only when the infra red equipament failed?>>
No. The volume increase was instantaneous and I think the SPR's most senior investigator might just have taken such possibilities (as well as equipment destruction) into consideration.
Posted by: MickeyD | March 14, 2010 at 02:38 PM
Maybe the people who crossed over while in a "beach, ocean or desert" scenario where affected so profoundly that they are the ones who stay and NOT come back (as in NDE). As for communications from those people, well...maybe they are too much at peace to chat.
Posted by: LP | March 14, 2010 at 04:21 PM
Sometimes I do little meditative exercises and pose questions while I am in a relaxed, dreamy state of mind. Since the "ocean" issue appears to be more complicated than I thought, I decided to try asking about it in today's meditation. Before I report the answer, I want to make clear that I don't know if I am getting any actual information from "the other side" in these exercises, or if it is only my subconscious and my imagination at work. Nevertheless, for what it's worth, here is the gist of what I was "told":
While many people love the ocean, for others it is a source of painful memories. People have drowned in the ocean. Ocean storms have wrecked homes and wiped out communities. Some people are afraid of the water.
The afterlife life environment generally consists of consensual thought-forms. Enough people have negative feelings about the ocean to make it ineligible for the consensus.
The same holds true for other environments like the desert, the jungle, and arctic wastes. Though some people like these environments, enough people dislike them to keep them out of the consensus.
The environments that do manifest are consensus environments that hardly anybody could object to. A garden, for instance, or a beautiful countryside. These consensus landscapes don't get vetoed by the objections of a vocal minority.
However, for those who want to experience the sea or the desert, etc., it is always possible to go outside the consensus and create a private environment for oneself and perhaps for a few like-minded souls.
In most cases, souls are attracted to each other by their degree of spiritual advancement and not by something as superficial as a preference for a certain type of landscape, so such private environments are relatively rare.
It is not unheard of for a very solitary soul to have an entire world - in effect, a private universe - all to himself. This world can be shaped according to his personal desires, with no compromises imposed by the consensus. The downside is that it's a solipsistic existence - no sharing.
Although I wasn't "told" this directly, it also occurs to me that the absence of nighttime from most descriptions of the "heaven" or "paradise" environment could also be explained in terms of consensus. If enough people dislike the dark, then darkness will not be part of the consensus reality.
As I said above, I'm not making any claims for the validity of this explanation or its provenance. It may be entirely a product of my subconscious. Then again, possibly there is some truth in it. Who knows?
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 14, 2010 at 04:38 PM
On Leslie Flint and Firebrace; when the IR failed I recall from the report that the difference was only in volume (i.e. it increased) and not in the nature of the phenomena produced.
The SPR rep was, I think, Drayton-Thomas not Firebrace although Firebrace was present. I can't see any of the references mentioned by David Fontana that might refer specifically to the instance mentioned as unfortunately Prof Fontana doesn't cross-reference the bibliography (this is a shame). If you are interested perhaps he would reply to an email request.
Flint was investigated many time and on at least one occasion it appears he was treated very unprofessionally. If he chose not to 'perform' in a specific instance that is his business and perhaps this instance should be weighed against the numerous occasions when Flint was tested.
It would have been a lot more helpful Vitor if you had researched Flint a bit more thoroughly before posting your comment. Particularly as at least one poster here new the guy personally over many years.
Posted by: Paul | March 14, 2010 at 04:48 PM
You know, something that bugs me about the idea of total-consensus is that it leaves less room for growth. We have to confront things we don't like sometimes. I used to be mortally afraid of waves, then I recently took up surfing. If everyone lives inside their comfort zone, you don't really develop as a person.
But it does seem that way in the afterlife, doesn't it? Maybe we should consider this before we pass on. We might be on Earth just to experience challenges, so we should continue to challenge ourselves in other planes as well.
Posted by: Cyrus | March 14, 2010 at 05:06 PM
It would have been a lot more helpful Vitor if you had researched Flint a bit more thoroughly before posting your comment.
I did this research. Scientific reports about Flint are very rare.
Particularly as at least one poster here new the guy personally over many years.
I knew that. I had a friend which I knew many years too. Recently he killed a person, and it don't seems to have been self defense. The true is that we never know what a person can do, even who we think we know very well.
Posted by: Vitor | March 14, 2010 at 06:02 PM
It strikes me that 'fish do not see the sea' much as humans do not 'see' atmosphere, however, we are aware of the superposition of atmosphere, weather. Both the sea and the desert are more contexts than places, and, in general, contexts often remain obscured on both sides of a veil... except, perhaps, to those who actively seek contact with contexts...
Posted by: organelle | March 14, 2010 at 07:13 PM
An interesting note - the Biblical book of Revelations describes the afterlife, at least from the Christian POV, which doesn't include large bodies of water: "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth. The former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea was no more". I'm unfamiliar with any other culture where the other side specifically has no oceans.
Posted by: Lance | March 14, 2010 at 08:54 PM
“Whereas personally, I insist on an environment with the full apparatus of senses. I have enough self-control in this life not to be an addict to anything. I won't be an addict over there.”
There are some that would state that seeking danger and excitement is indeed an addiction. What is the underlying reality for a need for danger and excitement? Maybe that seeking danger and excitement is not needed once one survives what we know as death. Maybe not.
Maybe cheating death to some by seeking danger and excitement is their way with dealing with our most repressed fears. Maybe not.
I think maybe reincarnation might be a possible choice for someone that wants to experience his or her senses to the fullest in a physical world.
Posted by: william | March 14, 2010 at 11:35 PM
MY understanding of the Book of Revelation talking about the removal of the sea in the 'New Heaven and Earth' is that the Jewish people of that time regarded the ocean as a place of unrest, disorder, where monsters and other evil creatures dwelt.For the sea to disappear thus was equivalent to the absence of evil.
Posted by: Jeff | March 15, 2010 at 01:27 AM
Hi Vitor
I don't understand the points you make above.
a) What research? What do you mean by 'scientific' research - if I want to find out about a person I don't (just) consult scientific journals. Your comments looked like you don't know much at all about Flint.
b) Your comment regarding a murderer is a non sequitur; In the case of Flint it would be sensible to ask those who know him what they saw and heard and figure out how this could have been faked if that is the nature of your interest. If I watched a friend murder someone I would not be able to entertain the same doubts as if I simply listened to hearsay.
Your comment that implies fraud because he did not subject himself to one particular test when he had to many others seems to me to be unreasonable.
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 03:08 AM
Vitor: I knew that. I had a friend which I knew many years too. Recently he killed a person, and it don't seems to have been self defense. The true is that we never know what a person can do, even who we think we know very well.
What on earth has that got to do with Leslie Flint?
It seems to me, Vitor, that you have never had any direct experience with the mediums you freely label as frauds.
Your so-called research consists of quoting others.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 15, 2010 at 06:12 AM
Hi, Paul
a) What research? What do you mean by 'scientific' research - if I want to find out about a person I don't (just) consult scientific journals. Your comments looked like you don't know much at all about Flint.
I mean that I searched scientific journals with reports about the experiments with him, and I found almost nothing. I don't want to know about Flint, I want to know about the tests with him.
b) Your comment regarding a murderer is a non sequitur; In the case of Flint it would be sensible to ask those who know him what they saw and heard and figure out how this could have been faked if that is the nature of your interest.
I don't want anedoctal accounts. I want scientific studies published in scientific journals.
Your comment that implies fraud because he did not subject himself to one particular test when he had to many others seems to me to be unreasonable.
The problem is that this test would put an end in the controversy. The other tests almost always have methodological problems.
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 07:35 AM
What on earth has that got to do with Leslie Flint?
This: it's not because a person says "I knew Flint, and I doubt that he fooled me all over these years" that I will trust in this person.
It seems to me, Vitor, that you have never had any direct experience with the mediums you freely label as frauds.
So what? He "chicken out" the test. That's very suspicious. Leonora Piper or Gladys Osborne Leonard NEVER "chicken out" any tests.
Your so-called research consists of quoting others.
So you see that I'm not the only one who doubts Flint's authenticity...
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 07:49 AM
Vitor: This: it's not because a person says "I knew Flint, and I doubt that he fooled me all over these years" that I will trust in this person.
I never said that - please don't put words in my mouth - that's not very scientific.
I based my judgement on the evidence of survival given to me, and others in our group, through his mediumship.
It seems to me, Vitor, that you have never had any direct experience with the mediums you freely label as frauds.
So what? He "chicken out" the test. That's very suspicious. Leonora Piper or Gladys Osborne Leonard NEVER "chicken out" any tests.
What utter rubbish! It's not suspicious at all. He became fed up with those so-called 'tests' when his object was giving survival evidence to bereaved people - a far more noble endeavour.
Are you also claiming then that Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard were above suspicion because they did 'tests' for a few researchers?
Your so-called research consists of quoting others.
So you see that I'm not the only one who doubts Flint's authenticity...
....who's the other one?
The ones who doubt are usually those who never sat with Leslie Flint and rely on the reports of others.
Have you ever had any personal experience with all the mediums you slate and label as frauds? You have continually dodged this question.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 15, 2010 at 08:27 AM
First time I've been to your blog. It's a facinating topic and I appreciate the comments/conjecture. Your post yesterday @ 4:38 is on the money for me. You get the heaven you envision. Thanks for the blog and its commenters.
Posted by: richard | March 15, 2010 at 09:33 AM
I never said that - please don't put words in my mouth - that's not very scientific.
I didn't said you said that either. Someone said "Particularly as at least one poster here new the guy personally over many years." and so I explained why I was not impressed by this.
I based my judgement on the evidence of survival given to me, and others in our group, through his mediumship.
I am doing the same: I am basing my judgement on the evidence that others had em Flint "chicken out".
What utter rubbish! It's not suspicious at all. He became fed up with those so-called 'tests' when his object was giving survival evidence to bereaved people - a far more noble endeavour.
That's your version of the history...
Are you also claiming then that Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard were above suspicion because they did 'tests' for a few researchers?
Few? (And yes, for me both are above suspicion)
....who's the other one?
D. J. West.
The ones who doubt are usually those who never sat with Leslie Flint and rely on the reports of others.
Or the persons which Flint refuses to do a session.
Have you ever had any personal experience with all the mediums you slate and label as frauds? You have continually dodged this question.
I had only one session with a pseudo medium who had a german doctor like control, but he spoke in Portuguese with an german accent. that's all.
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 11:10 AM
You won't find much evidence of the investigation of mediumship in scientific journals Vitor (as you probably know). If that's where you are looking I think you are wasting your time. If that is what you need to convince you of the veracity of mediumship or survival I don't think you are going to get anywhere (unless of course you are in a position to carry our such research yourself).
I do agree that the reports of others need to be properly understood but anecdotal evidence is not the same as a report by an eye witness of an event under controlled conditions (which Flint submitted to a number of times).
Your suggestion that Flint is fraudulent because he wouldn't submit to one examination (in fact he didn't refuse he simply didn't bother to respond as you rightly pointed out) is risible. I do not see the logic in your remark.
You have said yourself that you have had virtually no direct personal experience of mediumship other than one failed attempt. I think personal experience is vital even in the face of compelling evidence that such phenomena exist. I don't think you are going to get a reliable answer from your armchair.
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Correction: I meant to say "recent scientific journals". There is quite a bit from Lodge and Crookes.
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 11:37 AM
You won't find much evidence of the investigation of mediumship in scientific journals Vitor (as you probably know).
Wrong, Paul. I found much evidence with Piper and Osborne. This is not the case with Flint.
Your suggestion that Flint is fraudulent because he wouldn't submit to one examination (in fact he didn't refuse he simply didn't bother to respond as you rightly pointed out) is risible. I do not see the logic in your remark.
He "chicken out" in a decisive proof. This tells a lot.
You have said yourself that you have had virtually no direct personal experience of mediumship other than one failed attempt. I think personal experience is vital even in the face of compelling evidence that such phenomena exist. I don't think you are going to get a reliable answer from your armchair.
Wrong again, Paul. You don't know how much evidence I got against one famous medium here in Brazil called Chico Xavier (he is already dead) and many others. And I did this in my armchair.
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Vitor - I did say recent. I don't think the work on Osborne or Piper was recent really was it?
Your statement about Flint 'chickening out' is not reasonable however it does show the level at which you want to engage. You do not mention any of the other research carried out on Flint.
I am happy for you to have the last word on this as I think further debate with you on the matter is pointless.
Yes Armchair research which anyone can do and which there is endless debate about. It is interesting and useful but not really decisive is it? So you have solved the question of survival without leaving your armchair (other than a single visit to a medium which was fruitless)? I don't think so lol.
Anyway, I am sure anyone seriously interested in researching Leslie Flint will approach it in a balanced way looking at all the available evidence (of which there is quite a lot as he died only as recently as 1994).
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 12:47 PM
I am happy for you to have the last word Vitor as serious conversation with you on this subject is clearly pointless.
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Vitor: Are you also claiming then that Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard were above suspicion because they did 'tests' for a few researchers?
Few? (And yes, for me both are above suspicion )
Vitor, take a look at this:
As with other mediums of the era, Piper claimed the use of spirit guides or "controls". Among hers was a personality referred to as "G.P." and another called 'Phinuit'. The latter was purportedly a French doctor. Phinuit's French was limited to salutations like "bonjour" and "au revoir" and had little apparent knowledge both of the French language and medicine.
According to some accounts, medical people were surprised Phinuit did not know the French or Latin names for the many remedies Piper advised for her sitters, and Phinuit's historical existence could not be verified by SPR investigations.
Among other spirit guides she claimed were assuming control of her were a young Indian girl named Chlorine, a man named Hodgson, Martin Luther, Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt, Henry Longfellow, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington.
Martin Gardner writes in his essay “How Mrs. Piper Bamboozled William James” that transcribed records of Piper's séances clearly illustrate that she used the technique of cold reading and "fishing", as vague statements were followed by more precise information based on how sitters reacted.
Gardner reports that when caught in an error, Piper's "control" would invariably profess deafness and "leave" her, and that Piper was unable to discern between real and fictitious information fed to her.
Viror, do you still think Mrs Piper was 'above suspicion'?
Posted by: Zerdini | March 15, 2010 at 01:16 PM
I am doing the same: I am basing my judgement on the evidence that others had em Flint "chicken out".
No you are not: - you never sat with Flint nor did you receive any survival evidence from him as I and others did regularly and consistently.
That's your version of the history...
...Correct. You do not have a history of sitting with Flint!
I had only one session with a pseudo medium who had a german doctor like control, but he spoke in Portuguese with an german accent. that's all.
...and because of that you slate all mediums as frauds? Give me strength!
It's time to call a halt to this fruitless debate.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 15, 2010 at 01:34 PM
"Vitor, do you still think Mrs Piper was 'above suspicion'?"
I don't know about Vitor, but personally I do think Mrs. Piper was above suspicion. She was never credibly accused of fraud despite being tested on a daily basis for twenty years.
Her spirit controls may or may not have been who they said they were. Phinuit is questionable, but George Pellam seems to have been the real thing. As for Rector, Imperator, et al., who can say?
"Phinuit's French was limited to salutations like 'bonjour' and 'au revoir'"
I don't think this is quite correct. On some occasions Phinuit was able to conduct conversations in French, at a fairly simple level. But since Mrs. Piper learned some French in school, this proves nothing.
"had little apparent knowledge both of the French language and medicine"
From what I've read, Phinuit had knowledge of traditional herbal remedies but not of more modern medicine. Possibly this is knowledge Mrs. Piper could have picked up on her own.
"Among other spirit guides she claimed were assuming control of her were a young Indian girl named Chlorine, a man named Hodgson ..."
The Hodgson in question was of course the SPR investigator Richard Hodgson, who came through clearly enough to convince William James of Hodgson's continued postmortem existence.
Gardner's "cold reading" claim ignores the fact that many times Piper participated in proxy sittings, in which no one present knew the deceased. Much specific information, which was later verified,
came through these sessions. Cold reading doesn't work if the sitter has no information to reveal.
"Piper was unable to discern between real and fictitious information fed to her."
This claim appears to be based on a single case in which a skeptical researcher tried to trick Piper by feeding her information about a made-up person. Oddly, however, the investigator later admitted that he actually *had* known a person by that name, so it's not clear if the information was entirely fictitious or not.
Piper was unquestionably in a deep trance during the sessions. Efforts to awaken her, sometimes by applying smelling salts or even jabbing her with needles, had no effect. On one occasion she suffered lingering nerve damage to her hand from pressure applied while she was entranced.
"...and because of that you slate all mediums as frauds?"
Vitor doesn't think all mediums are frauds. He already said he regards Piper and Osborne Leonard as above suspicion.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 15, 2010 at 04:15 PM
"Vitor doesn't think all mediums are frauds. He already said he regards Piper and Osborne Leonard as above suspicion"
I cannot see how, according to Vitor,how they are above suspicion and Flint is not, especially since Flint does not appear to have been tainted with any suggestions of fraud levelled by those who have investigated him.
I do think Zerdini's comments illustrate the inconsistency in Vitor's comments about Flint.
Posted by: Paul | March 15, 2010 at 05:40 PM
Paul,
Vitor - I did say recent. I don't think the work on Osborne or Piper was recent really was it?
There are still many articles about both, very recently.
a) PHILIP COLE. Mrs. Piper Revisited. Australian Journal of Parapsychology 2001, Volume 1, Number 1, pp. 9-29
b)MICHAEL SUDDUTH. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 167–193, 2009. Super-Psi and the Survivalist Interpretation of Mediumship.
You do not mention any of the other research carried out on Flint.
Because I couldn't find any of the other research carried out on Flint in scientific journals. If you know, tell me the reference. Still today there are many articles about Sean Harribance, Ingo Swann etc.
Yes Armchair research which anyone can do
And why anyone did it before? 80 years had passed with almost all Brazilians thinking that Chico Xavier was an authentic medium. Only now I am changing this mentality. Do you want another example? This example you can see by yourself, you don't need to trust in my word. Go to this site:
http://www.pensar.org/2004-03-pastillas.html#fraud
It was me who noted that the face of the ghost was very similar to the other photos. My friend Kentaro Mori discovered the real photo. 80 years had passed and NO ONE had noted this. Me and Kentaro did this in our armchair.
So you have solved the question of survival without leaving your armchair (other than a single visit to a medium which was fruitless)? I don't think so lol.
I never said that.
Anyway, I am sure anyone seriously interested in researching Leslie Flint will approach it in a balanced way looking at all the available evidence (of which there is quite a lot as he died only as recently as 1994).
I hope so.
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 07:29 PM
“The problem is that this test would put an end in the controversy.”
What planet do you live on one test even a series of test will not put an end to this controversy. These cherished beliefs in the realm of materialism, scientism, religious, and spiritualism are not going to succumb to any test even a series of tests. This is the role of experience but even experience can be misleading.
I have known people that believe anything a medium tells them even if they find that medium at the local mall; not that a local mall may not have a medium of advanced abilities in mediumship abilities.
Posted by: william | March 15, 2010 at 07:36 PM
Hi, Paul
I cannot see how, according to Vitor,how they are above suspicion and Flint is not,
Because they NEVER "chicken out". Flint "chicken out".
especially since Flint does not appear to have been tainted with any suggestions of fraud levelled by those who have investigated him.
Those who have investigated him could not use a infra red cam, or they have their equipament destroyed. :-)
I do think Zerdini's comments illustrate the inconsistency in Vitor's comments about Flint.
You can think whatever you want.
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 07:37 PM
Hi, William
What planet do you live on one test even a series of test will not put an end to this controversy.
Ok. Let's say we would put the controversy in another level :-)
Posted by: Vitor | March 15, 2010 at 07:51 PM
There was a passage in Moby Dick that I always found strange and intriguing and related to OBE's in a manner, from Chapter Four:
"At last I must have fallen into a troubled nightmare of a doze; and slowly waking from it- half steeped in dreams- I opened my eyes, and the before sunlit room was now wrapped in outer darkness. Instantly I felt a shock running through all my frame; nothing was to be seen, and nothing was to be heard; but a supernatural hand seemed placed in mine. My arm hung over the counterpane, and the nameless, unimaginable, silent form or phantom, to which the hand belonged, seemed closely seated by my bed-side. For what seemed ages piled on ages, I lay there, frozen with the most awful fears, not daring to drag away my hand; yet ever thinking that if I could but stir it one single inch, the horrid spell would be broken. I knew not how this consciousness at last glided away from me; but waking in the morning, I shudderingly remembered it all, and for days and weeks and months afterwards I lost myself in confounding attempts to explain the mystery. Nay, to this very hour, I often puzzle myself with it."
I don't believe it comes up again in the book and I've done a little research and have never found any further explanation of what this story was about.
Posted by: Christian | March 15, 2010 at 08:38 PM
That's an interesting excerpt, Christian. Maybe it's a description of sleep paralysis?
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 15, 2010 at 11:52 PM
Michael,
When I first moved to Hawaii, a day was incomplete without a swim in the ocean. That lasted for perhaps a year. By the second year, I was going to the beach once a week and by the third year once a month. Now, after some 35 years here and living only a mile from a beach once rated by Dr. Beach as the best in the world, I get down there about once a year, if that. So perhaps the lure of the ocean is just an illusion.
Posted by: Michael Tymn | March 16, 2010 at 01:02 AM
Michael P: Vitor doesn't think all mediums are frauds. He already said he regards Piper and Osborne Leonard as above suspicion.
He gave a list of mediums (including Leslie Flint) who refused to participate in tests and implied they were all frauds.
Although I personally don't think Mrs Piper was a fraud the allegations by Martin Gardner were not addressed by Vitor who regarded her as 'above supicion'
That is inconsistent with his remarks regarding other mediums.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 16, 2010 at 04:07 AM
Zerdini,
Although I personally don't think Mrs Piper was a fraud the allegations by Martin Gardner were not addressed by Vitor who regarded her as 'above supicion'
Michael Prescott already had adressed this issue, so I thought it was not necessary to say anything more. Martin Gardner did a very poor work. See here:
http://michaelprescott.typepad.com/michael_prescotts_blog/2007/08/how-martin-gard.html
So, again: Piper and Osborne were authentic. Flint was a fraud. That's what I think.
My list:
a) Real mediums or psychics:
Piper, Osborne, Robert Rollans, Hella Hammid, George McMullen, Sean Harribance, Stefan Ossowieski, Ingo Swann, Joseph W. McMoneagle, Malcom Bessent, Pavel Stepanek, Alan Vaughan
b) Mediums or psychics which I am in doubt:
Home, Palladino, Schneider's brothers
C) Mediums or psychics which I think are frauds:
Flint, Nina Kulagina, Florence Cook, Chico Xavier, Mirabelli, Estelle Roberts...
Posted by: Vitor | March 16, 2010 at 07:38 AM
Where are the allegations of fraud against Flint? Apart from Vitor.
Posted by: Paul | March 16, 2010 at 08:20 AM
West did an allegation of fraud against Flint whe he said:
"This result lends strong support to the arguments of those persons who contend that the claims of contemporary physical mediums and their supporters are founded upon fraud and malobservation"
Posted by: Vitor | March 16, 2010 at 09:37 AM
If the various accounts of the afterlife were purely the product of fantasy, one might reasonably expect some of those fantasies to include bananas or hot pants. As far as I can tell, none of them do. Perhaps this argues that there is an underlying reality to these reports.
Or perhaps such ruminations are as silly as they sound.
Posted by: Garry Scholey | March 16, 2010 at 11:05 AM
I think I like Eileen Garrett. I've read a couple of books about her and I think she was the real deal. I am also a huge George Anderson fan. I think he is also the real deal. I have seen George Anderson work on a few TV shows and he is impressive. I have also read several books about George Anderson and he seems to be a decent and admirable human being. And I must admit that I like John Edward also. John Edward is charismatic, fun, entertaining, humorous, visually appealing, and he also seems to have some real psychic Medium abilities.
Posted by: Art | March 16, 2010 at 11:06 AM
Regarding Vitor's List:
In group A only Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard were mediums - the others are psychics. There is a big difference between the two. If Vitor doesn't know the difference there is nothing to discuss.
Group B were mediums. Palladino admitted she would cheat if given the chance.
Out of group C Nina Kulagins is a psychic not a medium.
Because Vitor thinks certain mediums are frauds let him supply the evidence not scurrilous accusations. He knows he can't because he has no personal experience of any of them. It's all based on supposition because they refused to take part in tests by people who were not qualified to comment on mediumship.
West did an allegation of fraud against Flint whe he said:
"This result lends strong support to the arguments of those persons who contend that the claims of contemporary physical mediums and their supporters are founded upon fraud and malobservation"
What test did West do? Please give full details.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 16, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Hi, Art
certainly there are other real mediums or psychics which I forgot. Mrs. Thompson, Eileen Garrett, Mrs. Chenoweth...
Posted by: Vitor | March 16, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Again Vitor, where are the allegations of fraud against Flint - not innuendo. Yours is a similar line of reasoning to that of a person who claims that they have won an argument because the other person gets tired of them and stops responding.
Which 'result' are you referring to? If you are referring to the suggestion Flint "chickened out" then we have already discussed this and it doesn't amount to any more than an adverse inference ignoring successful investigations, some of which you referred to. Not participating in an investigation isn't a 'result' of an investigation. An investigation requires a finding of fact. Since Flint didn't participate there can be no finding of fact.
If you choose to infer that Flint was a fraud, that would be one possible inference based on that single incident but to say it is a fact that he was a fraud based on it is preposterous.
Posted by: Paul | March 16, 2010 at 11:24 AM
If you choose to infer that Flint was a fraud, that would be one possible inference based on that single incident but to say it is a fact that he was a fraud based on it is preposterous.
Is not a single incident. The other was when the equipament failed. This is very suspicious too.
Posted by: Vitor | March 16, 2010 at 11:36 AM
In group A only Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard were mediums - the others are psychics. There is a big difference between the two. If Vitor doesn't know the difference there is nothing to discuss.
I know the difference. I mixed both intencionally. I wrote "mediums or psychics". In any case, there are materialist parasychologists which think that all are psychics.
What test did West do? Please give full details.
MY GOD! there was no test because Flint refuse to submit to infrared cams! Is his and in my opinion this strongly suggest fraud.
Posted by: Vitor | March 16, 2010 at 11:46 AM
I know the difference. I mixed both intencionally. I wrote "mediums or psychics". In any case, there are materialist parasychologists which think that all are psychics.
Why mix up psychics and mediums intentionally?
Who cares what materialist psychologists think anyway?
ALL mediums are psychic but not all psychics are mediums.
MY GOD! there was no test because Flint refuse to submit to infrared cams! Is his and in my opinion this strongly suggest fraud.
Why quote Donald West re Flint when he didn't do any tests?
His quoted remarks are, therefore, completely irrelevant.
You must be the only person in the world who can infer fraud because someone is not interested in tests.
Vitor, let's face it - you haven't got a leg to stand on.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 16, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Is not a single incident. The other was when the equipament failed. This is very suspicious too.
As I said to another poster: Suspicion is not enough.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence......and you haven't got any!
Posted by: Zerdini | March 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM
Vitor: As Leslie Flint said:
“When I first began to allow myself to be tested I was naive enough to believe that if the tests were successful the scientists and researchers who had carried them out under their own conditions would proclaim to all the world the truth of life after death. All too soon I learned the hard way that many of those who call themselves researchers have immutable values of their own which preclude belief of a meaning or purpose in man’s existence or the possibility of a life after death. Their concern was to disprove the reality of my voices and they would postulate any alternative, however far-fetched or absurd, sooner than admit the implication of their own successful experiment”.
Another comment:
Some of the more ludicrous explanations put forward by some of these so called researchers included suggestions the voices were not real but rather the result of some hypnotic power accompanied by mass hallucinations. This was later disproved when a throat microphone was attached to the throat of Leslie Flint during a sitting such that the slightest sound made through his larynx would be magnified enormously, while the researchers continuously observed him at the same time through an infra-red telescope. When Leslie Flint proved them wrong yet again, the best suggestion the researchers could come up with is that he must have the ability to talk through his stomach.
One impartial, open-Minded expert who did investigate Leslie Flint very thoroughly indeed was Professor William R. Bennett, professor of electrical engineering at Columbia University in New York City. As engineers are usually regarded as highly practical and level-headed people, his evidence was widely regarded to be of particular value. Professor Bennett had this to say of his own personal experience during a Leslie Flint sitting:
“My experience with Mr. Flint is first hand; I have heard the independent voices. Furthermore, modern investigation techniques, not available in earlier tests corroborate previous conclusions by indicating the voices are not his. But to be thorough, one should consider the possibility of live accomplices. This suggestion became untenable to me during his visit to New York in September 1970, when, in an impromptu séance at my apartment, the same voices not only appeared, but took part in conversations with the guests.”
Posted by: Zerdini | March 16, 2010 at 01:09 PM
What is particularly suspicious about IR equipment failing? Technical equipment fails under all kinds of circumstances. Are you suggesting Flint or an accomplice interfered with it - if so do you have ANY evidence to support such an assertion. Given this test was performed under controlled conditions do you think the experimenters are likely to have been hoodwinked in this way if so why? It is not enough simply to say they MAY have been as you are calling Flint a fraud and not simply suggesting that PERHAPS there was fraud. In these circumstances you must say why you are so confident if you wish to be taken seriously.
In any event, as you stated yourself, the only thing that changed was the volume of the person speaking. Not the nature of the information conveyed. The verifiable evidence is in the information conveyed not in how loud it is surely?
What exactly do you think the effect of the failure of the IR equipment was? It clearly functioned for some time during the test as it appeared to inhibit the volume of the communicator. Introduction of light (of which IR is a type) has always been injurious to some physical mediums although some such as Alec Harris are alleged to have produced phenomena in red light and in some instances Direct Voice has been heard in daylight. Does that mean all Direct Voice mediums not working in either red light or daylight are frauds. Of course is does not, that would be an illogical conclusion. Does it mean that it is more difficult to eliminate fraud - yes of course, but the phenomena of Direct Voice is based on the voice, personality and information passed. It wouldn't matter if the sitters were all blind on that basis.
I don't object to your suggestion that Flint MAY have been fraudulent. This is always potentially true, at least in principle, unless sufficient controls are in place to make this unlikely (are you saying they weren't in the example you give - if so on what basis as it was a controlled test?).
Your assertion that he WAS a fraud though is unreasonable even based on the limited information you have examined.
Posted by: Paul | March 16, 2010 at 03:19 PM
"If the various accounts of the afterlife were purely the product of fantasy, one might reasonably expect some of those fantasies to include bananas or hot pants. As far as I can tell, none of them do. Perhaps this argues that there is an underlying reality to these reports.
Or perhaps such ruminations are as silly as they sound."
LOL. I can see how you would look at it that way. From my perspective, though, it's something of a mystery that such a popular locale as the beach doesn't show up in NDEs, channeled communications, or deathbed visions very often, if at all. Given the thousands of reports, we might expect to see more of a variety of environments.
A garden seems to be the overwhelming favorite, showing up far more often than other settings. Why should this be? Is there something hardwired into the human psyche that makes us imagine a garden paradise as opposed to some other environment? Is it purely the result of childhood exposure to stories about the Garden of Eden? I don't know.
It's also interesting that the cliches of pearly gates, angel choruses, clouds, etc. are very seldom mentioned in NDE accounts, channeling, or deathbed visions. If hallucinations and fantasies account for these experiences, why do they run contrary to so many people's expectations?
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 16, 2010 at 04:58 PM
One thing I wonder about NDEs is if they are hallucinations, why does everyone dream about dying and going to the afterlife? I'm actually expecting to hear accounts where people experience near death but don't report going to the afterlife but just dream as if they were asleep, which is where I think you should be seeing things like the beach, ocean, etc. that we're discussing here.
I also recall a study I can't remember off the top of my head that found that NDEs didn't conform to any religious beliefs. The study did Christians and Hindus, and with Hindus you have to remember a core part of their beliefs is reincarnation. Working on that, if NDEs are a result of expectations, one would imagine a Hindu NDE may consist of dreaming of living in your next life on Earth. However, the study found that Hindu experiencers went through the similar spiritual world scenario that most people go through, which in the light of Hindu beliefs of reincarnation doesn't make sense.
Not using this is evidence or proof, but just something to think about.
Posted by: Aftrbrnr | March 16, 2010 at 06:23 PM
To follow up, yes, I think it is an excellent and very intriguing example of sleep paralysis. After doing some digging, I found that this quote is fairly well cited in articles about sleep paralysis. This one is a good read for a number of different reasons.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/06/science/alien-abduction-science-calls-it-sleep-paralysis.html?pagewanted=1
The relationship between sleep paralysis, OBEs and lucid dreaming is a good place to start when investigating these phenomena. Like with dreams, everyone agrees that sleep paralysis is 'real' on some level. So that's something.
What I find most entertaining about the Moby Dick reference is that the 'chasing of the white whale' resonates with the search for truth in the 'fringe'.
Posted by: Christian | March 16, 2010 at 08:46 PM
That's a good observation, Aftrbrnr, and brings out a serious point made (perhaps inadvertently) by the commenter I quoted. Namely, if NDEs are hallucinations, why *don't* they include "bananas and hot pants"?
A hallucination, like a dream, can have pretty much any content imaginable. So why aren't there NDEs where the person sees himself playing piano at Carnegie Hall, or winning the Super Bowl, or seducing a supermodel, or hang-gliding in Hawaii, or ...?
Considering the possible range of human fantasies, which is at least as broad as the range of things we dream about, it's surprising (to say the least) that NDEs tend to reproduce the same patterns and environments over and over again.
Skeptics try to explain this by saying either a) there are variations in NDEs, or b) the commonalities can be explained as reactions to specific kinds of brain trauma. (E.g., the "tunnel" is a reaction to the brain's visual center shutting down.) The trouble is that a) the variations are minor compared with the repetitive patterns, and much less significant than would be expected in hallucinations; and b) NDEs occur in all sorts of circumstances in which the brain is traumatized in very different ways. (And sometimes in cases where the brain has not been physically traumatized at all - for instance, cases of mountaineers who had an NDE while falling, but landed safely.)
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 16, 2010 at 08:48 PM
Michael, from your own blog Botkin article: "Pam laughed and said, "My mother was sitting on a large rock by the beach in one of those old-style bathing suits, but the surroundings were more beautiful than any beach I've ever seen. She communicated to me in a very clear way that she was very proud of what I had accomplished in my life. She said there was no reason for me to feel guilty about anything. I felt a warm connectedness like we used to have. When Mom was alive, there was always a touch of sadness in her smile, but that was gone and she looked genuinely happy."
Posted by: Richard Doyle | March 17, 2010 at 03:05 AM
Zerdini,
tell me: why you never used a infra red cam with Flint? By the way, why NO ONE could use infra red cams?
Posted by: Vitor | March 17, 2010 at 08:05 AM
Thanks for the reminder, Richard. I'd forgotten that one.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 17, 2010 at 08:31 AM
Zerdini, tell me: why you never used a infra red cam with Flint? By the way, why NO ONE could use infra red cams?
Vitor, I am quite happy to tell you.
When I commenced sitting with Leslie Flint in 1971 I did not have an infra red cam. I did, however, have a cheap tape recorder with which I taped all the seances I attended.
The evidence was outstanding by any standards. For example, I spoke to my grandfather for nearly 40 minutes.
I never found a reason to use an infra red cam although Leslie would not have minded if I had suggested one. Others did as I have a photo of the 'voice box' taken with an infra red camera.
There was nothing in the slightest way suspicious.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 17, 2010 at 12:29 PM
Hi, Zerdini
But why only photos, and not films? Since Crookes, we know that photos most of the time are not enough to convince the people...
Posted by: Vitor | March 17, 2010 at 01:32 PM
"But why only photos, and not films? Since Crookes, we know that photos most of the time are not enough to convince the people..." Vitor
-----------------------------
LOL! If someone doesn't believe not even films would convince them. Even if someone were to come back from the dead and poke them in the eye. Arguing with a disbeliever is somewhat akin to beating your head against a cinder block.
Posted by: Art | March 17, 2010 at 01:57 PM
I spoke to my grandfather for nearly 40 minutes.
This is not enough.
"It is, I confessa, very puzzling problem( it is, in fact, the problem to which I alluded above) to account for the faith, undoubtedly genuine, which Spiritualists have in the personal reappearance of their
departed friends. Again and again have I asked those who have returned, from an interview with a Spirit at the Cabinet, to their seats beside me, whether or not they had recognized their friends beyond a peradventurea, nd have always received an affirmative reply, sometimes strongly affirmative. I was once taken to the Cabinet by a woman and introduced to the Shade of her dead husband. When we resumed our seats,I could not help asking her: 'Are you sure you recognized him?' Whereupon she instantly retorted,with much indignation, 'Do you mean to imply that I don't know my husband?'
Again, at another stance, a woman, a visitor, led from the Cabinet to me a Materialized Spirit,whoms he introduced to me as' her daughter, her dear, darling daughter,' while nothing could be clearer to me than thef eatureso f the Mediumi n everyl ine and lineament. Again and again, men have led round the circles the Materialized Spirits of their wives, and introduced them to each visitor in turn; fathers have taken round their daughtersa, nd I haves eenw idowss obi n the armso f their dead husbands. Testimony, such as this, staggers me. Have I been smitten with color-blindness ? Before me, as far as I can detect, stands the very Medium herself, in shape, size, form, and feature true to a line, and yet, one after another, honest men and women at my side, within ten minutes of each other, assert that she is the absolute counterpart of their nearest and dearest friends, nay, that she is that friend. It is as incomprehensibleto me as the assertion that the heavens are green, and the leaves of the -trees deep blue. Can it be that the faculty of observation and comparison is rare, and that our features are really vague and misty to our best friends? Is it that the Medium exercises some mesmeric influence on her visitors, who are thus made to accept the faces which she wills them to see? Or is it, after all, only the dim light and a fresh illustration of la unit tous les ehats sont gris? The light, be it remembered, is always dim at these stances, and it is often made especially dim when a Spirit leaves the Cabinet. I think I have nevern been able at such times to read the Arabic numerals on my watch, which happen to be unusually large and pronounced. Unquestionably Spiritualists will be at no loss to explain this puzzle; possibly they woulds ay that I have hereu nconsciouslyg iven one of the very best of proofs of the reality and genuinenesosf Materialization,a nd that my unbelief acts on the sensitive,e vanescentf eatureso f the Spirit like a chemical reagent, and that-but it is not worth while to weaken by anticipation their solacing arguments."
Source: Preliminary Report Of The Commission Appointed By The University Of Pennsylvania (1920)
http://www.archive.org/details/
PreliminaryReportOfTheCommission
AppointedByTheUniversityOfPennsylvania
Posted by: Vitor | March 17, 2010 at 01:59 PM
Vitor: I spoke to my grandfather for nearly 40 minutes.
This is not enough.
It is enough for me!
Flint was an 'Independent Direct Voice' medium not a materialisation medium so, in that context, the rest of your quote is irrelevant.
I have read the Pennsylvania report before but what is the relevance to Flint?
None.
As I've said before, Vitor, your own experiences would be more intersting than rehashed copies of others experiences.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 17, 2010 at 03:01 PM
But why only photos, and not films? Since Crookes, we know that photos most of the time are not enough to convince the people...
Vitor, I have not the slightest interest in 'convincing the people'.
I am happy to share my experiences but I am not a spiritual evangelist.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 17, 2010 at 03:06 PM
Zerdini,
in materialization we can touch and hear the spirit. In Direct Voice we can only hear..if many people were fooled in materialization phenomena, I can't even imagine how many were fooled in the direct voice phenomena...
Posted by: Vitor | March 17, 2010 at 03:11 PM
Zerdini, when speaking with your Grandfather for 40 minutes during a Leslie Flint session, did he ever say anything or reveal anything verifiable to you that ONLY YOU in that room would know about, and that Flint and the others present couldn't have possibly known?
I'm talking about things that your Grandfather knew in life, that non-relatives at the sitting wouldn't possibly know, that if it were him coming through, he would also know and relate to you after death when you spoke to him, to prove to you that it's actually him speaking.
Those are the most convincing elements of spirit communication to me, when the spirits say things that prove they are who they say they are, where the medium and others present wouldn't have a clue.
Posted by: Eteponge | March 17, 2010 at 03:36 PM
I did, however, have a cheap tape recorder with which I taped all the seances I attended
Zerdini, are these tape records available online?
Perhaps you should converter them into mp3 or some digital technology to preserve them.
Posted by: Zetetic_chick | March 17, 2010 at 04:00 PM
By the way, I know some Flint's tapes are available online, but my question is if Zerdini's tapes, recorded personally by him, are available
Posted by: Zetetic_chick | March 17, 2010 at 04:04 PM
Zerdini, in materialization we can touch and hear the spirit. In Direct Voice we can only hear..if many people were fooled in materialization phenomena, I can't even imagine how many were fooled in the direct voice phenomena...
Vitor, I understand your attempts to downplay Direct Voice and Materialization but it just won't wash.
In Direct Voice it's the evidence that counts - there is nothing to see.
Friends who sat with me had regular talks with their son who 'died' aged sixteen from cancer. He proved to be a very fluent communicator and I had many chats with him too.
Regarding materialization - the difference between you and me is that I have experienced it in good light and you haven't - so there is nothing to discuss.
I will add, however, that while I held the hands of a materialized spirit he simply dissolved through my fingers. The dematerialization began from the feet up.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 12:18 AM
Hi Eteponge
Those are the most convincing elements of spirit communication to me, when the spirits say things that prove they are who they say they are, where the medium and others present wouldn't have a clue.
I agree. The first communicator who spoke to me in the Direct Voice was my grandmother.
No-one including the medium knew anything about me or my family. I had simply written to the medium asking if I could attend a seance. It as a short sentence as anyone who knows me will testify - I don't write long letters.
He replied giving a date and time - that was all.
The answer to your questions is yes he did.
BTW - I like your blog.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Zerdini, are these tape records available online?
Perhaps you should converter them into mp3 or some digital technology to preserve them.
By the way, I know some Flint's tapes are available online, but my question is if Zerdini's tapes, recorded personally by him, are available
Hi ZC
I would if I knew what mp3 was!
I confess I am not au fait with digital technology.
My tapes are personal to me and will not be available online. I might put transcripts up if they are relevant.
Many recordings are available online courtesy of the Leslie Flint Educational Trust who hold the copyright to the recordings.
They can be accessed at: www.leslieflint.com
On their site you can read the very last interview Leslie gave before he passed. That was in 1993 and was serialised in the Noahs Ark Society magazine.
I should also point out that there was often periods of silence between communications. In fact on one occasion the voice suddenly stopped mid-sentence and as nothing further was heard for 30 minutes the seance was abandoned.
When we left the seance room we discovered there had been an electrical storm at the the exact moment the communication ceased.
This is one of the anomalies of mediumship which is difficult for us to understand.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 02:33 AM
Zerdini, do you know of any reputable Direct Voice Mediums or Materialization Mediums, in your opinion, who still live in this present day?
I've always wanted to attend one of these types of sessions.
I've had very convincing personal experiences with Mental Mediumship, but none of the other types.
Posted by: Eteponge | March 18, 2010 at 02:46 AM
Eteponge, I have a large number of contacts all over the world but do not know of a single reputable direct voice or materialization medium, I'm sad to say.
I admit I find this surprising as in these times of instant communication they should be around somewhere!
If you'd asked me 20 years ago I could have put you in touch but not today.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 03:25 AM
I wonder if, alternatively, a reputable Mental Medium were able to connect with Leslie Flint in Spirit, if Leslie could produce the Direct Voice Phenomenon around the Medium, from The Other Side.
That's an intriguing idea. Do Mediums who have passed on still maintain their gifts after death, I wonder.
Posted by: Eteponge | March 18, 2010 at 03:54 AM
I have spoken to Leslie Flint a few times since his passing and he doesn't seem to have changed much.
From what I have been given to understand mediums remain mediums on the Other Side (if they so wish) although they are used to communicate with spirits in higher spheres.
The medium through whom Flint communicated has now concentrated on mental mediumship and has put physical mediumship to one side.
This is not to say he won't start again but it seems unlikely at the moment.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 04:08 AM
When we left the seance room we discovered there had been an electrical storm at the the exact moment the communication ceased.
This is one of the anomalies of mediumship which is difficult for us to understand.
Ok, this seems very suspicious too. It seems like a bad functioning of an equipament due to the storm, like a radio, a walkie talkie, a microphone...anything which could transmit the human voice.
More and more I get convinced that Flint was a fraud.
Posted by: Vitor | March 18, 2010 at 11:37 AM
How can you be more convinced than you were earlier when you were certain lol?
Posted by: Paul | March 18, 2010 at 02:23 PM
As an aside Vitor surely you accept there is a big difference between seeing how a fraud might be carried out and a fraud actually occurring?
I am beginning to think it is pointless trying to discuss the matter with you as you seem only to respond to points which you can think of a response too and ignore the other points being made.
As a final comment, and I don't know whether you understand what Direct Voice is or not, Direct Voice relies on the hearer being able to identify the speaker - not simply by voice but as, if not more, importantly by content. You might be able to imitate a friend of mine if you knew him but you would not be able to recount shared experiences or give information known only by myself and the friend. The problem with not reading about the medium (which you already said you are not prepared to do) is that you do not have an opportunity to consider such evidence.
Whether you think Flint was a fraud or not isn't really important unless you can provide some evidence. So far you have made unfounded accusations and made inferences which are open to different interpretations to support your assertion that he WAS a fraud. I have to say your approach is neither logical not reasonable. Produce some facts and it might be worth considering your opinion.
Posted by: Paul | March 18, 2010 at 02:35 PM
I am curious as to Vitor's opinion as to the direct voice medium Etta Wreidt.
Vice Admiral W Usborne Moore begins his book, The Voices, with an account written by M. Chedo Miyatovich, ambassador to
England from Serbia. Mr. Miyatovich relates how by direct voice he conversed in Serbian with his mother, and how his friend, a
doctor of law, H.Hinkovitch, had an exchange with an acquaintance in Croatian. Also how Frau Professor Margarette Selenka spoke
with her husband in German. Admiral Moore makes it clear that Mrs. Wreidt spoke English only, and in his opinion that not very
well.
It is hard to challenge the authenticity of Etta Wreidt. Mrs. Wreidt never went into trance, did not use a cabinet, and was
able to produce voices in daylight and full artificial light, although she preferred darkness because the results were better.
Very many more than the languages mentioned above were produced at Wreidt's seances, at times while Mrs. Wreidt was chatting with
sitters.
While Leanora Piper and Gladys Osborne Leonard, two mediums who meet Vitor's stringent criteria, were thoroughly studied by
the SPR, Wreidt displayed no interest in being tested, but only in assuaging the grief of bereaved individuals. Therefore, as far
as I know, a judgment of her mediumship by the SPR was never rendered.
Does the fact that Wreidt never submitted to investigation by the SPR negate her mediumship? The same question might be
asked of Emily French and John Sloan, two mediums of unquestionable integrity. There is an entire line of mediumship that lies
outside the record of SPR activity.
This brings us to the case of Leslie Flint. In my opinion it is unwise to come to any conclusions regarding the "chickening
out" of Flint without taking into consideration the historical situation as of 1947. Very briefly, this was a time when the new
discipline of psychology was coming under the dictorial grip of behaviorism, a view of the human mind that was essentially absurd.
This trend was reflected in the shift from the study of survival to the bean-counting approach of Joseph Banks Rhine and his
wife, Louisa. It was a time of turbulence and much politicking as organizations such as the SPR struggled to gain admittance to
the select group of sciences. Conditions were very unfavorable for a person such as Flint to get a fair rendering of a verdict.
That he elected not to put himself to such a test is not surprising.
NOte that Admiral Moore called the SPR "The Society for the Prevention of Research." Perhaps more consideration should be
given to activity going on outside the proscribed territory of the SPR and to the historical situation as of 1947.
Posted by: W Vogt | March 18, 2010 at 03:15 PM
It is also interesting to note that the SPR doesn't investigate anything. Individuals do.
The SPR has a diverse group of individuals comprising its membership ranging from believers in survival to complete sceptics.
The SPR as a body does not express a corporate opinion.
Vitor said: More and more I get convinced that Flint was a fraud.
More and more I get conviced that you are a fraud. Prove me wrong.
Posted by: Zerdini | March 18, 2010 at 03:29 PM