Blog powered by Typepad

« The last trumpet | Main | Palladino »


I do not think Michael Prescott's raising of legitimate questions about the protocol and results of a recent seance in Sydney is akin to being a closed-minded skeptic as Mr. Zammit would lead his readers to believe. Even taken out of context's Michael's criticisms of the seance are not overbearingly skeptical, just practical criticisms and observations. But taken in the context of Michael's general openess to psychic phenomena of all sorts and as demonstrated by his numerous writings in support of the belief in psychic phenomena, often critiquing skeptical arguements and demonstrating the fallacy of the skeptical point of view, it seems as if Mr. Zammit is picking a fight with the wrong person. Anyone who has read Michael's blog can clearly see that Michael, to the consternation of many "skeptics", is very open to psychic phenomenon, and sometimes comes under criticism from the same skeptical quarters that Mr. Zammit is accusing Michael of residing in.

It seems to me that the proponents of psychic phenomena like Mr. Zammit do their cause a great disservice when they fail to address legitimate criticisms and questions about the evidence the put forward in regards to psychic phenomena, such as his recent sceance in Sydney. Michael was not raising the typical claptrap criticisms that closed-minded skeptics often raise regarding psychic phenomena. Michael raised some very legitimate questions, and they should be addressed considering the highly controversial nature of the claim, that spirits from the afterlife were contacted and recorded recently in Sydney. It is not open minded or scientific to simply dismiss criticisms of one's research out of hand. Even mainstream and mundane science experiments come under routine criticisms that they must address in order to fulfill the rigors of science. Mr. Zammit should keep a level head and simply address the critcisms, especially when the come from generally sympathetic quarters like an obeserver such as Michael Prescott. I have to agree with Michael, the sydney tapes are not terribly impressive and certainly leave the impression of being some sort of fakery, and the onus is clearly on those claiming these are voices from the afterlife to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Conduct another seance under even more rigious conditions, if necessary. There is no reason for us to just accept this as evidence of life from beyond, and I too am one who believes in and has reported my own psychic phenomena.

Thanks, John!

Hey, you seem to doubt that etherians can materialize i know you were not there so doubt is necessary however you seem to have no trust in Victor Zammit which has very high credientals and David Thompson he clearly shows on his website that precautions were taking place so there is no fakery and here the vocies for yourself sorry but that is not fakery I do appreciate you supporting the afterlife but at times you seem to doubt it.

The comments to this entry are closed.