An angry communicator

Having focused on some problems with mediumship and other afterlife evidence, and on the possibility that some of the evidence can be explained by sociological and psychological factors (such as mania) and by the influence of a collective unconscious constructing the desired phenomena, I now want to look at some of the strongest evidence, which seems to resist these explanations. A good place to find such evidence is The Survival Top 40, a website created by Miles Edward Allen, which lists many of the most compelling cases. 

One of the better ones, currently #29 on the Top 40 list, is "The Rationalist Spirit." I'd suggest reading the detailed summary (PDF) provided by Miles Edward Allen; like all his summaries, it's well-written, clear, and gets directly to the point. Below I'll provide a briefer synopsis. 

Alan Gauld, a longtime and highly respected parapsychological researcher, spent some time working with a home circle in Cambridgeshire, England, in 1959. While with the circle, he learned of a case from 1943 involving a drop-in communicator - someone with no known connection to anyone in the group. Fortunately, detailed records had been kept, including verbatim transcripts of the sessions, which were conducted with a "talking board" (a Ouija board or similar item). 

The communicator in question identified himself as "Adolf Biedebmann," adding, "I always was known and called Gustav." In his first appearance, on January 4, 1943, he was hostile and insulting. The spirit control, "Peter," warned, "A little later I am going to let the eel through.... Humour him. Get to know him. We can then deal with him from here." 

"Gustav" then took over the planchette, insinuating that he had impersonated "Raymond and a Doctor James" (presumably Raymond Lodge and William James) in an earlier session. When told that the group wanted to help him, he replied, "I do not want your help." The group said they were taught to help those who need it. "Wrong teaching," the spirit huffed. "I am not going to be bloody well pally [friendly] with you. Mind your own business. I did not come here to talk to you. Shut up."

He pretended to be a female spirit named Molly or Mollie - his spelling varied - but despite his insistence that they "mind [their] bloody business,"  the group quickly divined that he was male. "I was a man who always kept to himself," he added, inadvertently revealing his sex. "Damn," he commented when his slip was pointed out. 

Religion was "bloody rot," he said. When asked to be reasonable, he replied, "Shut up. Buggar you.... Only Hitler can help. He is the master mind.... I knew Hitler." Claiming his nationality was German, he took credit for a sentence in German that was spelled out by the board in a previous sitting. He lived in London, at a house in Charnwood Lodge. By the end of the session, he seemed calmer and more friendly. "Peter" assured the group that "Gustav" was genuinely sorry for his rude behavior, adding, "And he is German."

Three days later, on January 7, an apologetic "Gustav" showed up, giving his "correct name" (a version of his name given in the earlier session was inaccurate). "I was a rationalist," he said. "A type of religion to follow only the reasoning of one's own mind. It puts a barrier around." That was partly why he had been lonely in the spirit realm. "I was turned seventy when I passed away," he said, going on to explain that his references to Hitler were intended "to hurt." 

On February 4, he made another appearance. "I had my own business," he recalled. "In some remote way I am associated with the Lond[on] University." He said he'd passed over a year ago, and when asked if he was connected with publishing, made reference to the Rationalist Press. 

Gauld, examining the case in 1959, discovered the existence of a Dr. Adolf Gustav Biedermann (only a slight variation on the name Biedebmann, which was presumably misspelled during the session). Miles Edward Allen summarizes:

[He] was a German-born, naturalized citizen of England who lived at Charnwood Lodge on the outskirts of London until he died at the age of 73. He was a fairly wealthy businessman who also worked in the Psychology Department at London University.

Those who knew Biedermann described him to Gauld as an arrogant, obstinate, and aggressive man who, nevertheless, could be a pleasant companion when one got to know him. He seemed to revel in his German heritage and never dropped his accent. One acquaintance portrayed him as "an out-and-out rationalist" who may well have been attached to the idea of Aryan superiority.

He was hostile to claims of telepathy, and to religion. In his will he left money to the Rationalist Press Association. 

The case is strong for several reasons. First, the communicator matches up extremely well with the earthly Biedermann in terms of demeanor, beliefs, and personal history. Second, there was a clear progression from hostility to remorse and friendliness, suggesting the activity of a living mind, not a static bundle of memories. Third, no other communicator at this home circle ever behaved the way "Gustav" did; if the mental influence of the sitters or planchette operators had been responsible for the messages, we might expect to see other cases like this involving the same persons, but there were none. Fourth, the loneliness and confusion of "Gustav" dovetails with statements made through many channelers about the state of mind of spirits who hold a deep antipathy to spiritual values and a strong commitment to the ego. 

The only question I would raise is whether either of the planchette operators could possibly have known of Biedermann during his lifetime and unconsciously recreated his personality, manipulating the planchette either through subtle, unintentional muscular movements or via PK. But this seems doubtful, given the absence of any motive on the part of the sitters to bring "Gustav" to the circle. And it is unlikely that a casual acquaintance could know such details as Biedermann's legacy to the Rationalist Press. 

Comments

[Roger Knights]

It'll be fun if Randi comes through, especially if he gives Jane Roberts material for a new set of teachings.

[Bruce Siegel]

Thanks for that, Michael. Interesting account. I agree with you that the emotional aspects of these cases--feelings and behaviors that are difficult to quantify, and that skeptics love to make light of--can add a lot to their weight as evidence.

It reminds me of another piece of survival research that I recently learned about through a reader at Skeptiko. This one involves past lives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HayY1yyXnn0

Have you seen this, Michael? It's a TV program (from the 80's, I believe) about the work of one Peter Ramster, someone I had never heard of before. It's by far one of the best parapsychological shows I've ever seen. Low-key, scholarly, in-depth, unsensationalistic. And extremely evidential.

I know that past-life regression is easy to discount, but the story of this man's work with several clients should give anyone reason to re-consider. In the program, he regresses four people to what seem like past lives, and then travels with them to the locations where those lives unfolded.

Some of the information these people have about their past lives--details that are confirmed during the program and evaluated by experts and witnesses--is remarkable.

But the reason that your post today reminded me of this TV show, is that in both instances, the emotional component adds a lot to the strength of the cases.

During the moments when these women first encounter the actual buildings and locales in which they lived so long ago, their emotional reactions are powerful and touching. Not easily faked, I would think.

That added a lot to the case, as far as I'm concerned. These stories just feel right to me, though I know that sort of reaction will not sway many skeptics.

If there's a weakness in this show, for me it's in the final episode. While the case is compelling overall, part of it seems a bit of a stretch. The subject describes a pattern that she remembers on a stone embedded in a floor. They find the stone, much to the amazement of the current dwellers of the house. But the pattern itself seems impossible to make out clearly, at least to me.

But that's a small quibble. I'd love to get the reactions of others to this program.

[Ben]

My first thought was that the changes in mood and personality and the misspellings were a sign that the whole thing was being ad-libbed. Matching Gustav's personality is one thing; how about matching his intellect? Don't let him just get away with saying religion is rubbish.

Asking his opinion on a difficult philosophical position (eg what does he think about God or free will) might be rather more revealing (and more interesting).

[Michael Prescott]

It would probably be hard to avoid misspellings and brief answers when using a Ouija board.

It's interesting, though, that what looks like strong evidence to one person can look like weak evidence to someone else. Just shows how difficult it is to really nail this stuff down.

[sbu]

The maybe greatest 'survival inconsistency' you didn't mention in your previous post is that of the existence of a deity. "religion is rubbish" what is that supposed to mean?

[Paul]

Perhaps there is a distinction between religion and the existence or not of a deity.

[Michael Prescott]

It seems clear that Gustav, in calling religion "bloody rot," was clinging to his rationalist perspective, not reporting on anything he might have learned in the afterlife. (It appears he had not learned much at that point, since he was isolated from other spirits and stewing in his own juices.) His later comments apologizing for his rude remarks and attributing them to rationalism seem to bear this out.

To me, the most poignant part of the story is this message: "I was a rationalist. A type of religion to follow only the reasoning of one's own mind. It puts a barrier around."

From personal experience I can confirm the truth of this. Rationalism, in the sense of over-reliance on ratiocination at the expense of intuition and feeling, does indeed "put a barrier around."

[Bruce Siegel]

"From personal experience I can confirm the truth of this. Rationalism, in the sense of over-reliance on ratiocination at the expense of intuition and feeling, does indeed "put a barrier around.""

Excellent. Jean Liedloff speaks of the need "to make of the intellect a competent servant rather than an incompetent master."

[someone]

Interesting Case. I think emotional interaction like this is common in many mediumship cases (although this one gleans extra strength from the fact that no one knew the ostensible communicator). My opinion of personality gained through ESP is essentially that of Gauld's, but one can make their opinion based on there interpretations of the case. Braude did make some good points in Immortal remains with relation to DID.