One thing that frustrates me about paranormal research is that the field seems to suffer from a pervasive case of short-term memory loss. People are constantly announcing “new” approaches that turn out to replicate work that was done decades or even generations earlier.
A recent example is the statement released by John M. Fischer upon receiving a John Templeton Foundation grant of $5 million for research into life after death. Fischer makes it sound as if no one has ever conducted any serious, sustained, properly supervised, peer-reviewed research in this area. Readers of this blog know that nothing could be further from the truth.
A less egregious, but still slightly irksome, example came to my attention today, in the form of a recently released book by Jeffrey A. Marks called The Afterlife Interviews: Volume 1. Marks is a medium who sat with 14 different individuals who asked him questions about the afterlife. He conveyed his answers to them, and then organized these replies into a book – or apparently two books, since this is Volume 1. It's an interesting idea, I guess, though it seems to me it would have been better to use a variety of mediums and see to what degree their statements dovetailed.
But what got me a little ticked off was that, even though Marks styles himself as a paranormal investigator, he seems to be largely unaware that the territory he's exploring is far from new. I should point out that I haven't read Marks' book itself, only an excerpt from the introduction that's available on the Amazon sales page via the “search inside” feature. Still, that was enough to suggest that the author knows little about the vast amount of channeled material describing conditions on "the other side." His only acknowledgment of it is a) a short discussion of Emmanuel Swedenborg; b) a passing mention of "glimpses of what the nature of the afterlife was like" in communications studied by the Society for Psychical Research a century ago; and c) Geraldine Cummins' book The Road to Immortality, which purportedly channels F.W.H. Myers.
The casual reader could logically conclude that until now, no one -- with the exceptions of Cummins and Swedenborg -- has offered a detailed explication of conditions in the spirit world.
Marks writes:
I have observed that the history of ghost research has always been wrought with the simple question “Why?” But to me, it needed to go a bit further. Not only the “why,” but to ask from the ghost's own point of view, “what is a spirit's life like?” It was a perspective no one had really taken before, at least not to my knowledge. Some of the questions I asked were: “Do you still perceive the movement of time?”; “Do you notice a tunnel of light following you?”; “Do you ever get hungry?”; “Do you sleep or are you always awake?” Despite what some in the spiritual/metaphysical community have said, there are spirits who are willing to talk about the nature of the afterlife.…
So when I kept hearing that single all-important critique of modern mediums–“Why don't they tell us what the Other Side is like?”–I knew from my research at haunted locations asking EVP questions to ghosts (who are existing “in-between” our world and the Other Side), that I could do the same for spirits who had crossed “through the light” all the way over to the Other Side. Why not? I have been a practicing medium for over a decade. Perhaps the reason other mediums have not gotten answers is because they're too focused on assisting their client, who can admittedly get caught up in the moment of communication, or they don't believe they can get sensible answers.…
What do these possibilities [ i.e., the communications] present?
A view, as we have never been offered before, on the nature of surviving death and what awaits us – straight from the mouths of those who are there.
The trouble is that the view on display in The Afterlife Interviews is hardly one “we have never been offered before.” From what I can tell, it's entirely in line with a vast amount of pre-existing material, including -- in no particular order --Life in the World Unseen, by Anthony Borgia; Testimony of Light, by Helen Greaves; Raymond, by Oliver Lodge; The Blue Island (channeling W.T. Stead), by Pardoe Woodman and Estelle Stead; Through the Mists, by Robert James Lees; Spirit World and Spirit Life, by Charlotte Elizabeth Dresser; Gone West, by J.S.M. Ward; Letters from the Light, aka Letters from a Living Dead Man, by Elsa Barker; The Spirits' Book, by Allan Kardec; and Intimations of Immortality, by Robert Crookall.
This is by no means a complete list. I'm not sure anyone could exhaustively catalogue all the titles in this sprawling category. The literature is so extensive that Richard Matheson, who found himself impressed by it, was able to create a comprehensive and detailed picture of the afterlife for his novel What Dreams May Come -- a book that includes a lengthy and valuable bibliography. And it's not as if this material is terribly obscure. Matheson's novel was made into a big-budget movie, after all.
Now, much of this allegedly channeled material is questionable. I find that Borgia's book, for instance, reads like fiction, and parts of Cummins' two books channeling Myers are hard to swallow. But the point is, this ground has been trod before. In fact, it has been covered so thoroughly that I'm not clear on how another book, coming through a single medium, can add much to what has already been written. Of course, there's always room for more data -- but must we believe that just because the data are recent, they represent "a perspective no one had really taken before"?
I wonder what it is about paranormal research that has us perpetually reinventing the wheel. Rather than building on the work of those who came earlier, each new generation seems determined to start from zero. It's hardly the way to make progress -- either in this life or the next.
I have read literally thousands of near death experiences plus books on quantum physics and the holographic Universe theory. I have also read a couple of hundred books on paranormal research including Dean Radin's book on consciousness and Pimm Van Lommel's book, both of Peter Fenwick's book, Ken Rings, Michael Sabom, Moody, and Melvin Morse, Gary Schwartz Afterlife Experiments, etc. Those that I couldn't find I ordered from Amazon. From all those sources I think I've come up with a pretty good picture of what heaven will be like. The physics of heaven will be very different from here. It will be the physics that one might expect if one were living in or on a holographic piece of film. I think "heaven" is the holographic film that our universe is a projection from.
What Do We Know About Heaven?
#1. Heaven seems to be a place where thoughts are things and consciousness creates reality.
excerpt from Mark H's NDE:
"Suddenly I thought of a mountain, I had seen as a child. When I looked up from the road there it was; The Mountain! Not just the mountain! But the most breathtaking mountain I had ever seen! Details the likes of which no one could imagine. Colors shades of color, shadows for which there are no words in the human language to describe it."
http://www.nderf.org/mark_h%27s_nde.htm
excerpt from A.J. Ayer's NDE:
"Did you know that I was dead ? It was most extraordinary, my thoughts became persons."
http://gonsalves.org/favorite/atheist.htm
#2. Heaven seems to be a place where time and space do not exist; at least not in the same way they do here. The physics of the other side is very different than this physical universe:
"I was told that before we're born, we have to take an oath that we will pretend time and space are real so we can come here and advance our spirit. If you don't promise, you can't be born." (from Jeanie Dicus' near-death experience, 1974)
"Space and time are illusions that hold us to our physical realm; out there all is present simultaneously." (from Beverly Brodsky's near-death experience, 1970)
"During this experience, time had no meaning. Time was an irrelevant notion. It felt like eternity. I felt like I was there an eternity." (from Grace Bubulka's near-death experience, 1988?)
"I didn't know if I had been in that light for a minute of a day or a hundred years." (from Jayne Smith's near-death experience, 1965?)
"Earthly time had no meaning for me anymore. There was no concept of "before" or "after." Everything - past, present, future - existed simultaneously." (from Kimberly Sharp's near-death experience, date unknown)
"Time could also be contracted, I found. Centuries would condense into seconds. Millenniums would shrink into moments. The entire civilization that I was part of passed by in the blink of an eye." (from John Star's near-death experience, date unknown)
http://near-death.com/experiences/articles004.html
#3. Heaven is a place where the feelings of oneness and connectedness seem to be infinite and overwhelming:
excerpt from Mark Horton's NDE:
"I suddenly just relaxed completely and allowed "myself" to dissolve (?) open up (?) merge (?) into the "oneness" that surrounded me."
http://www.mindspring.com/~scottr/nde/markh.html
excerpt from Michelle's NDE:
"I remember understanding the others here.. as if the others here were a part of me too. As if all of it was just a vast expression of me. But it wasn't just me, it was .. gosh this is so hard to explain.. it was as if we were all the same. As if consciousness were like a huge being. The easiest way to explain it would be like all things are all different parts of the same body."
http://nderf.org/michelle_m%27s_nde.htm
#4. Heaven seems to be a place where just by thinking about a place or time we can go there and experience everything about that time and place:
excerpt from Mark Horton's NDE
“I had to merely think of a place and time and I was there, experiencing everything about the place and time and people present.”
http://www.mindspring.com/~scottr/nde/markh.html
#5. And Heaven seems to be a place where because of those feelings of oneness and connectedness we will share the experiences of every living creature that existed:
excerpt from Randy Gehling's (age 10) NDE:
"That was really cool! I kind of felt as though my body exploded - in a nice way - and became a million different atoms - and each single atom could think its own thoughts and have its own feelings. All at once I seemed to feel like I was a boy, a girl, a dog, a cat, a fish. Then I felt like I was an old man, an old woman - and then a little tiny baby."
http://near-death.com/experiences/animals04.html
#6. And last but not least; Where is heaven? It seems to be all around us:
Excerpt from little Daisy Dryden's death bed vision:
"Two days before she left us, the Sunday School Superintendent came to see her. She talked very freely about going, and sent a message by him to the Sunday School. When he was about to leave, he said, "Well, Daisy, you will soon be over the 'dark river.` After he had gone, she asked her father what he meant by the "dark river." He tried to explain it, but she said, "It is all a mistake; there is no river; there is no curtain; there is not even a line that separates this life from the other life." And she stretched out her little hands from the bed, and with a gesture said, "It is here and it is there; I know it is so, for I can see you all, and I see them there at the same time."
http://www.survivalafterdeath.org.uk/books/barrett/dbv/chapter3.htm
Posted by: Art | September 06, 2012 at 09:48 PM
Who is Jeffrey A. Marks?
Here is what he says about himself:
Jeffrey A. Marks, Consciousness Explorer and Educator
At a very young age, I had my first experience into the exploration of consciousness when paranormal events affected my entire family -- we lived in a nasty haunted house. From my parents to the family dog, everyone was harassed by the spirits there. As time passed, continued occurrences also presented me with my own emerging psychic capacity. Like many young people who face such unexplained events, I reacted in fear and confusion. But as time progressed, I knew I had to take the bull by the horns, so pressed forward and straight into the heart of exploring for the true nature of consciousness and answers for the unseen world which kept popping up around me.
Taking an active interest in science, quantum physics, consciousness research, and human potential, I began an avid exploration into the nearly 130 years of investigative work previously done in the areas of psychical research, thus gathering a down-to-earth understanding of what is typically considered mysterious and sometimes mystical. In addition, I have continued to expand on my own psychic capacity and have shared this ability with hundreds of people. Wanting to not only embrace but also understand the scientific mechanics of these potentials, I have taken my years of research along with extensive personal experience and written the book, “Your Magical Soul: How Science and Psychic Phenomena Paint a New Picture of the Self and Reality”.
In addition to being a published author, I am also a past president of the Washington State Ghost Society. Today I am still an active member and work to diligently educate and assist the public regarding the true facts about paranormal phenomenon, as I and my fellow paranormal researchers have come to understand them.
As co-founder and co-host of the internet radio show “Explorers of Consciousness” as well as conducting a monthly Q&A Forum on various related topics, I seek to continually use scientific data as well as personal experience to educate others on the nature and power of consciousness.
Posted by: Zerdini | September 06, 2012 at 10:07 PM
He claims: "I began an avid exploration into the nearly 130 years of investigative work previously done in the areas of psychical research, thus gathering a down-to-earth understanding of what is typically considered mysterious and sometimes mystical."
As Michael says, and I concur: "I wonder what it is about paranormal research that has us perpetually reinventing the wheel."
Posted by: Zerdini | September 06, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Yes, this is ridiculous!
Posted by: Matt Rouge | September 07, 2012 at 01:33 AM
I think all sciences to some degree reinvents itself every now and then. People will want to reproduce past experiments or is unaware of others work even in the natural sciences.
parapsychology is probably more affected due to
the problems with reproducibility.
Posted by: sbu | September 07, 2012 at 02:06 AM
There sometimes seems to be a general assumptions, particularly among skeptics, that there is no research or evidence whereas in fact there seems to me to be a significant body. Perhaps this type of thing is symptomatic of that type ignorance?
On the other hand, almost everything seems over-hyped these days.
Posted by: Paul | September 07, 2012 at 06:36 AM
I think there is selectivity of evidence even amongst the people who are aware of the research. Some people find Scole overwhelmingly favorable and some find it nothing but simple stage tricks or genuine pk phenomena with no proof of survival.
I think we are biased from where the evidence comes from as well. Take Inridi Indridiason, the Icelandic physical medium for example. Under alleged controlled conditions, over and over produced materialization, direct voice, levitations etc. There was an entire committee set up to study him under controlled conditions and he reproduced phenomena, converting many skeptics. However, you rarely hear about him in the research which I find baffling. Had he been in the U.S. or the U.K. he certainly would have attracted more attention.
Source for more info: https://notendur.hi.is/erlendur/english/IndridiPSPR_v53p214_1989.pdf
Posted by: Ray | September 07, 2012 at 08:41 AM
Had he been in the U.S. or the U.K. he certainly would have attracted more attention.
attention in the u.s. and the u.k you mean.
Posted by: sbu | September 07, 2012 at 12:52 PM
yes thanks for the distinction :)
Posted by: Ray | September 07, 2012 at 01:02 PM
Ray, I had heard of Inridi Indridiason and even read a few vignettes, but never such a robust account as what you linked to. Thanks. Overall, my impression is that the phenomena surrounding Inridi were pretty much a chaotic psychic stew; evidential of something, of what I'm not exactly sure.
The temporary missing arm bit is particularly unusual and interesting.
Posted by: no one | September 07, 2012 at 02:33 PM
No one,
I think that's the misconception of his phenomena but he's also responsible for a case in the survival top 40 list :
http://www.aeces.info/Top40/Cases_51-75/case70_FireIceland.pdf
Sorry I'd summarize it but they do a good job on the link provided. Couple this with the physical phenomena he displayed and it's quite compelling I think
Posted by: Ray | September 07, 2012 at 03:33 PM
I think a lot of wheel reinvention comes from a complete lack of fully empirical data to start from. Even the best proven information has a bit of doubt attached to it, and some of SPR's best successes are so old that you can't readily contact the ones involved with them. You have to read through a lot of junk data, fake psychics and product peddlers, and then you're not really given full certainty unless you were personally there. If you look at spirit research from a position of non-belief or agnosticism, the data in some cases is highly suggestive or interesting but not empirical. There's also a lot of flaws on both ends of the fence (supporters don't blind their studies well enough, detractors have willfully overlooked their own statistics).
Really, where do you start? Without a good launchpad of solid information, you really can't help avoid wheel reinvention.
Posted by: Joshua Cearley | September 08, 2012 at 05:41 AM
Not trying to be flippant, but when you re-invent the wheel, it is no longer a wheel.
Posted by: richard | September 08, 2012 at 09:42 AM
Haven't you invented something else then? Ergo you haven't reinvented the wheel :)
Posted by: Paul | September 08, 2012 at 10:10 AM
"Not trying to be flippant, but when you re-invent the wheel, it is no longer a wheel."
The expression implies that the inventor is unaware that the wheel has already been invented by someone else, and thus he wastes his time developing something that already exists. It's not as if he's taking an existing wheel and modifying it. He thinks the wheel is a new idea, not realizing it's already been thought of.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | September 08, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Replication for verification sake is always acceptable, but doing something for purposes of profit or otherwise, claiming it is something new, is disgraceful to the original innovators. In any science. I think the opposition to this research in the past, however, compels some to present the research as "new" to increase the attention their own research is given. It seems like Marks knows the past research well, so I'm thinking he has one of those ulterior motives.
Posted by: Sleepers | September 08, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Michael I was recently talking with my 19 year old son and he observed how as a little kid playing his first shootem-up video game he completed the final level and was so impressed by his own achievement he thought it'd be all over the papers and on the news.
In a sense though his boyhood self was right. It was an historic moment for him personally especially given he didn't know others'd been playing similar games for a long time.
My point is this seems to be a stage mystics go through on piercing the veil because what they witness is eternally pristine and brand new.
I remember reading Gopi Krishna's Kundalini: The Evolutionary Energy in Man and being astonished by him claiming he was the first man in history to attain the state of enlightenment.
I used to think there was a point to the ego but it's more and more clear to me there's a clear distinction between the social construct which makes everyone think you're Michael the writer and I'm alan the commenter and the thing which given its head'd make the entire universe bow down to it.
Posted by: alanborky | September 08, 2012 at 03:04 PM
Just love your blog. When you die, who will you come back to and prove that you still exist? I'm open and have had others contact me after death. I'm thinking that you, Michael, could prove life after death. Why not set up some contacts? Like Houdini, an experiment.
Hope you live a long, happy life.
Posted by: Mariev Finnegan | September 08, 2012 at 06:42 PM
"I find that Borgia's book, for instance, reads like fiction"
Monsignor Robert Hugh Benson was a son of Edward White Benson, former Archbishop of Canterbury.
Anthony Borgia met him when he was at the height of his renown, both as preacher and author.
After he had passed from his life, “I many times wondered as to his welfare. Through a spirit friend I was told that he was well and prospering, and that in time I would hear from him directly.”
Such eventually proved to be the case.
Borgia was also a fine medium with a strong gift of clairaudience.
Anthony Borgia stated: “It has been my privilege and pleasure to act as his amanuensis for recording the scripts” which were given through automatic writing.
He also said that, through other sources of communication, “we have had literally hundred of foregatherings, where he has brought with him a goodly company of spirit friends”.
This was through the trance mediumship of Mollie Duncan.
Maurice Barbanell spoke to Lord Northcliffe through her mediumship and was present when Anthony Borgia spoke to Benson who “spoke fluently and characteristically.”
In 1942 the “People” newspaper serialised, in a number of instalments between April 5th and June 14th the scripts received by Anthony Borgia called “Beyond This Life”, which later became the book, “Life in the World Unseen”
The book was sold out on the day of publication.
The publishers were Odhams Press.
Anthony Borgia passed in 1989 at the age of 93.
Posted by: zerdini | September 09, 2012 at 10:07 AM
I know that Borgia's book is supposed to be authentic channeled material, but it reads like fiction to me. Your mileage may vary ...
Posted by: Michael Prescott | September 09, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Borgia also wrote "More about Life in the World Unseen", "Facts" and "Here and Hereafter".
Posted by: zerdini | September 09, 2012 at 12:27 PM
Strangely enough, Borgia's book is actually said to be the most accurate depiction of the Afterlife according to a dead person contacted through automatic writing, as discussed in the book "Across the Line."
Posted by: Kathleen | September 09, 2012 at 02:24 PM
Maybe I should give it another look. I think Richard Matheson drew on it pretty heavily for his novel What Dreams May Come.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | September 09, 2012 at 06:14 PM
Posted by: Roger Knights | September 10, 2012 at 02:01 AM
I don't know about the Amazon lists, but many of these books are quite old and long out of print, so they won't show up on any retailer's site.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | September 10, 2012 at 09:09 AM
A lot of these older books are off of copyright and can be downloaded for free. Go to this url to download Borgia and more: http://www.ghostcircle.com/_ebooks.html There's a bunch of other free books describing the Afterlife, too.
Posted by: Kathleen | September 11, 2012 at 04:33 PM
A huge afterlife library to read free online: spiritwritings.com
(The link is not working right now, but I've encountered that before and it's always come back later.)
I must have read several score books from there.
Posted by: Ginny | September 11, 2012 at 07:06 PM
Thanks, Ginny and Kathleen!
Posted by: Michael Prescott | September 11, 2012 at 09:31 PM
A bunch of great free books here too (I especially recommend the Charles Drayton Thomas ones):
http://www.survivalafterdeath.info/library.htm
Posted by: Ginny | September 11, 2012 at 10:50 PM
I really love Sir William Barrett's book Death Bed Visions. It's at the link that Ginny shared with us.
http://www.survivalafterdeath.info/books/barrett/dbv/contents.htm
This is a really positive and uplifting book that if you want to feel good about life I highly recommend you read. It's only about 26 pages long but I think it's some of the best 26 pages I've ever read. It's not a long read.
Posted by: Art | September 12, 2012 at 05:15 PM
Posted by: Roger Knights | September 15, 2012 at 09:40 AM