The gift of doubt

Some years ago, security consultant Gavin De Becker wrote a worthwhile book called The Gift of Fear, which argues that fear, while ordinarily seen as a negative emotion, can actually serve a very positive and useful purpose in keeping us safe.

Maybe it's time for a book called The Gift of Doubt.

Most of us who are interested in the subject of life after death probably think it would be great to have no doubt -- to be utterly convinced of the reality of the afterlife once and for all. No more questions, no more searching, no more annoying equivocations, no more listening to that irritating skeptical voice in our heads -- just the sweet relief of certainty! We may find it frustrating that the evidence, while much stronger than most people realize, is nevertheless not quite conclusive. We may envy those who have achieved a state of total, unquestioning certitude.

But perhaps we shouldn't. There may be real advantages to maintaining some degree of doubt. We can see these advantages more clearly by looking at people who have lost all doubt, and how they have fared.

Many near-death experiencers report that they have lost all fear of death and are completely convinced that a beautiful afterlife awaits them. This might sound like a desirable frame of mind. But follow-up studies tracking these people (notably those conducted by P.M.H. Atwater) have found that many of them encounter a great deal of difficulty in readjusting to their normal, everyday lives following their NDE. They complain of feeling alienated from other people, of longing for the glorious afterlife environment and feeling dissatisfied with the comparatively mundane world around them, of feeling unfocused, of having difficulty committing to the priorities of their regular life. They may report extreme emotional sensitivity to relatively trivial stresses. Their relationships may suffer; their marriages may fail. On the plus side, they typically report significant spiritual growth. Whatever has happened to them clearly has had both positive and negative consequences.

Not infrequently, people who have had transcendent mystical experiences -- glimpses of what Richard Bucke called "cosmic consciousness" -- face increased difficulty in dealing with the workaday world. It's not a coincidence that many such people have retreated to a life of solitude and contemplation, finding the hurly-burly of everyday life too difficult to handle. Those who do remain out and about in the busy world may find themselves struggling heroically to balance their preternatural insights with their ordinary responsibilities.

Is it possible that some degree of doubt about the ultimate nature of life and death is psychologically healthy? That this kind of doubt is actually necessary to maintain a balanced state of being? Perhaps so. People who have become unhesitatingly convinced of the afterlife through their own personal exploration of the subject sometimes seem to gradually lose their critical acumen and eventually fall victim to obvious hoaxes and scams. The clearest example may be Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, whose total commitment to the reality of life after death seems to have led him to accept some very dubious -- and in some cases definitively disproven -- claims, such as the purported materialization abilities of the Davenport Brothers and, most notoriously, the "Cottingley fairies" case.

An even more troubling development is the fanaticism that can accompany the absence of all doubt. The 9-11 hijackers apparently were motivated, at least in part, by the belief that they would be instantly transported to Paradise; the members of the Heaven's Gate cult, who committed mass suicide, were convinced they would be reborn aboard an alien spacecraft. In these cases and many others like them, some element of doubt might have prevented people from taking rash and tragic actions.

If doubt is, in fact, a useful component of our psychological makeup, perhaps it's not surprising that absolutely conclusive evidence for life after death remains, for most of us, somewhat elusive. The world may be set up in such a way that we get just enough evidence to dispel some doubt but not enough to dispel all doubt. If unquestionable scientific proof of life after death were ever announced -- something so conclusive that no one could dispute it -- the consequences for humanity might be pretty scary. An element of doubt may help keep most of us grounded; removal of all doubt could have unexpected and unwanted side effects.

So perhaps we should make friends with our doubt. Instead of treating the condition of doubt as a problem that needs to be solved, we might be better off seeing it as a necessary component of good psychological health. We might even be grateful to the universe for making it possible for most of us to maintain some degree of doubt.

In wishing for the resolution of all doubt, we may be wishing for something that's actually unhealthy. Like the child who longs to play with his daddy's gun, we may be better off not getting what we think we want. And the universe, like a wise parent, sees to it that most of us don't.

Comments

[Art]

I have a friend at Church, Todd, that had a near death experience when he was a child when he was hit by a car. He suffers from what you talk about. He said he spent the first half of his life trying to do things to get him back to where he was. He says he remembers the love he felt in the light. He says he still doesn't know why he was sent back and he is looking forward to going back to where he was. Todd is now married and has a wife and two sons. His oldest son is a really handsome teenage young man. I told him that perhaps those two boys are enough of an answer?

Alison Krauss sings a song called "There is a Reason" and in the song there is a line that goes something like "I do believe but forgive my unbelief." When it comes to asking questions about God, creator(s) of the universe, life after death, spirits, angels, beings of light, etc. I don't think we will ever have definitive answers. All we are allowed or given are little rare glimpses. Just enough to tantalize us and give us the barest whisper of hope. Just enough to keep us from sinking into despair but not enough to where we have 100% absolute confidence that there is "life after death."

I doubt if we will ever be allowed to know absolutely 100% for certain that there is life after death. If my theory is correct that one of the main reasons we are here is to experience "duality and separation" - and the death of someone we love is the ultimate lesson in separation - then knowing absolutely for certain that there is "life after death" and that one day we will be reunited with those that we love would defeat or weaken that lesson.

Life seems to be one long lesson in separation from the moment we are born and we separate from our mothers and the umbilical cord is cut till the day we die and our deaths become a lesson in separation to the loved ones we leave behind.

And "knowing" absolutely for certain that there is life after death would defeat what I believe to be one of the main purposes of life, experiencing duality and separation.

[Kris]

Hey Michael

I wanted to pass this story on

http://www.wtov9.com/news/21573274/detail.html

[Cyrus]

I'm uncertain if some cosmic force is preventing a mainstream acceptance of the afterlife. Really it's our own psychological makeup that keeps us doubtful of what we cannot normally see, hear, taste, or touch.

Heck, I'm a little doubtful of the nation of Nauru, I've certainly never been there.

After an NDE experience some are able to see, hear, taste and touch it--and that's when the phenomena you mentioned occurs. This is proof that it is possible to know with absolute certainty. And it does seem to cause [ep[;e problems.

I believe doubt is important just as MP stated in his post, rather spot-on actually.

Those who desperately want to die and return to the 'light' seem like 'light addicts' to me. They had this very pleasurable experience and they desperately want to go back.

Maybe the reason they are so desperate and yearning for this other world is because on Earth we are starved of spiritual knowledge. So the NDE is like being fed your first drink of water.

Maybe if afterlife knowledge were more mainstream, you could have an experience like this and think:

"OK... So this happened to me. It falls in line with what everyone understands. It's perfectly natural. I know there are better conditions in that world, but the pain and occasional hardship of this world is part of my educational experience, and I can now better appreciate the challenges of this world by knowing it is truly temporary".

Someone has an NDE and there's no real guidance afterwards. There's no institution or center of knowledge to go to about it and better understand our relationship with the other dimensions.

Instead the NDEer is left alone with this experience that is taboo to mention in public. I can see how this would drive people loony.

So one can accept the afterlife (this is certainly possible for those who are in routine communication with the deceased) but the thing to doubt is our own attitudes, opinions, and beliefs.

A common belief is the afterlife is absolutely better than Earth.

Well maybe that's not the case. What if Earth is better in some regards? Learn a bit of zen, accept pain and change, and discover how the challenges of living on this rock are incredible and exhilarating for us. We may not be able to experience this anywhere else.

[william]

“We might even be grateful to the universe for making it possible for most of us to maintain some degree of doubt.”

Doubt, there is one way to remove all doubt. Ok not all doubt but doubt that exists in one aspect of our thoughts. I have had one realization in my life that removed all doubt concerning one aspect of reality but it was not about life after death. From my point of view the realization that we are eternal souls is the most popular definition of what most call enlightenment.

But one can have realizations on many aspects of what we call life’s mysteries. My realization was about the relative phenomenal world, which I called at the time understanding variation. Because that was the name of the presentation I was giving at the time of my realization from a chapter in a book that W Edwards Deming had given the title as quality, productivity, and competitive position. It came in an instant and it removed all doubt concerning the role of understanding variation as it applied to quality, productivity and competitive position. Only a slight smile came over my face and no one in the room even knew it had occurred.

In my wildest dreams I did not know this realization had anything to do with spiritual reality. I was pretty much leaning atheist, very much materialist and certainty was not religious. Religion has and had been even as a child very suspect for me.

So far I don’t think I have been able to share that realization with anyone with one exception. A supervisor at an electronics plant at one of my seminars jumped up and stated, “oh my god I have been doing everything wrong with my people; how I rank and rate their performance” she went on and on and it appeared to me she got it. I did not keep in contact with that person and I wish I had to this day.

I remember reading a short overview of what a Russian wrote as an article or a book on the benefits of doubt. I could not and have not found it. Because doubt exists I suspect there is a spiritual reason that doubt exists. Almost always we souls and humans want to take full responsibility for our doubts that we view as some form of deficiency or ignorance.

My realization, which removed doubt, led me to discover (not realize) that our ignorance or unawareness has its home in innocence. Many confuse religious conversion with a realization but they are different as after a religious conversion one can go back to their former way of viewing the world. After a realization one cannot go back to the former way of viewing that former aspect of reality.

Doubt indeed may be a gift from the God. Without any doubts or lack of perfect knowledge what would the life of a soul be like? Could absolute infinite Oneness express its dynamic potential without creating Beings that have no doubts?

[Jeff]

I understand the point you're making, and it's a valid point, but it doesn't necessarily have to be a valid point. It wouldn't necessarily be valid if everyone knew there was life after death, because that would change the whole paradigm we live in. People wouldn't be as concerned with materialism anymore. They wouldn't be concerned with being the best competitor. They wouldn't necessarily have a cutthroat, 'survival of the fittest' attitude to get to the 'top'. They wouldn't be concerned with the 'daily grind' of going to work to pay the bills. They wouldn't be concerned with debts. People are in a rush to succeed before they get to old. But if they knew they were living forever in some form, they wouldn't necessarily be in a rush anymore. If people knew there was life after death, everyone would be free to do as they want without limitations...because there's life after death! So who would care about the trivial things we are concerned with in everyday life now? What would they have to fear?

You mention the alienation that some NDErs feel after their experience, but that's because they are living in a world of doubters. The people surrounding them have a different viewpoint than they do. The lives the people surrounding them live are lived by a different viewpoint. Essentially, some NDErs sort of become like fish out of water. But if everyone understood what they understood, they would no longer be alienated.

So yes, in the currently established paradigm we live in, I suppose doubt can be a good thing. But if that paradigm were to shift to one where everyone knew there was life after death, that may change.

There are some lessons that are best learned as an atheist. For example, I developed my sense of ethics and morality when I was a materialist. I read about the fact that if you think people who treat you unfairly are despicable then if you don't want to think of yourself as despicable, you have to treat other people fairly. It is a simple matter of self-respect. This had a big influence on me. I don't rely on fear of punishment or karmic retribution in the hereafter in order to do what I believe is good and right.

I'm not shy about saying what I believe in, and I'll debate the issue with people who are looking for a debate, however I don't like it when religious fundamentalists try to convert me to their religion and so I try not to be pushy towards people of other religions including the religions of materialism, scientisim, and skepticism.

[william]

“They wouldn't necessarily have a cutthroat, 'survival of the fittest' attitude to get to the 'top'.”

I am not so sure of this. I think not having doubt alone will not create the world you foresee without doubt. Would the elimination of doubt of life after death create such a society? My research indicates that life on the other side can be very harsh in other dimensions and they have lost their doubts about life after death. They now know they survived physical life. But they still live selfish lives.

Love and divine intelligence appear to be the most important aspect of what our reality is not only in this world but also in these other dimensions. Doubt may be a variable but maybe not the most significant variable/s for a moral society.

Maybe because of our level of love and intelligence we are in the exact place we need to be with our existing doubts. There is also trust in the universe and some would say trust in God. Maybe there is a profound relationship between our level of intelligence not intellectual aptitude but universal intelligence and our level of love for self and others that correlates with our level and amount of doubts.

“I don't rely on fear of punishment or karmic retribution in the hereafter in order to do what I believe is good and right.”

I doubt that belief in a good and right came from a survival of the fittest evolution of consciousness process. There appears to be a universal reality called for lack of a better term love.

I agree scientism, materialism, and skepticism can become a religion. I also agree that a fear of punishment can have a profound impact on the emotional well being of our minds. I often think that religion is somewhat responsible for much of our overflowing in our prisons. We do in America have the most people attending a church and that call them selves Christians then any other industrialized nation. Is there a causal correlation between religious beliefs based in fear and the number of people in prison? Maybe, maybe not.

[Kevin]

Doubt.

I've been dealing with this theme all day, so I'm glad it has come up here.

On Tuesday afternoons, I meet with a small group of fellow graduate students for a "spiritual group" and we discuss how we are getting along each week, from a spiritual angle. We are all coming from various faith backgrounds, or none at all, but we are all committed to exploring spirituality.

Today I shared that I am struggling a great deal with attaining happiness -- with getting to that place where you know you are living well and are most likely accomplishing what it is you are supposed to be accomplishing. As has been said to me many times before, I was told by many in the group to "enjoy the journey" and "just be".

I stated that this is exactly what I cannot do, and noted that there are three great divisions within spirituality -- those being doing/being/becoming approaches to spirituality and that my own approach is one of becoming. I noted as well that the awareness of my mortality drives me even harder to figure out what the hell I ought to be doing with myself -- though to no avail. At this point a Christian in the group said, "OH... now I understand. Yes, I can see why you feel that way now. But, since I have a relationship with Jesus Christ I don't have to worry about what will happen to me when I die and I can just enjoy life as it is."

I was dumbstruck -- and deeply hurt. All at once, my lifelong sense that I am here to develop into something more than I currently am was invalidated and I was also told (in so many words) that I was headed for hell, and ought to be quite disturbed about it.

Having been brought up in a Protestant church with a very conservative theology, I am no stranger to Christianity. But, in recent years, I have come upon more and more information that paints all of Christianity in a terrible light. My whole childhood faith rested on the inerrancy of the bible, and in the past five years I have only come to find that the bible is filled with questionable material frequently attributed to authors that had nothing to do with its creation. In addition, I have found that there are no historical records of Jesus that were written during his own lifetime -- which includes the four gospels. Not only do I feel doubtful -- I feel outright pissed off for being deceived!

But to cut it short, I was wondering if anyone would like to comment on something. Michael Tymn, in an early posting on his blog says the following in reference to Spiritism and Spiritualism: "Spiritists and Spiritualists reject the atonement doctrine of orthodox Christianity, but all Spiritists and many Spiritualists believe Jesus of Nazareth was the most superior spirit to ever incarnate on earth and that he was on a divine mission to teach all humanity universal spiritual truths, including the existence of an afterlife. He is the role model for Spiritists and many Spiritualists."

If the information I have encountered during my past five years of soul searching is correct, there is a great argument to be made against a historical Jesus ever existing. BUT... the above statement suggests that there is some other evidence for Jesus' existence -- albeit psychical. Would anyone care to comment?

Thanks!

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

I think I have used this quote here before, but let me repeat it.

Victor Hugo asked the communicating spirit who claimed to be Martin Luther why God doesn’t God better reveal himself. The reply came: “Because doubt is the instrument which forges the human spirit. If the day were to come when the human spirit no longer doubted, the human soul would fly off and leave the plough behind, for it would have acquired wings. The earth would lie fallow. Now, God is the sower and man is the harvester. The celestial seed demands that the human ploughshare remain in the furrow of life.”

Also, I am not nearly as sure as you seem to be that Doyle was duped by the Davenport brothers. I think this is another case in which the debunkers' theories, based upon their not understanding the nature of physical mediumship, became "fact."

"Today I shared that I am struggling a great deal with attaining happiness -- with getting to that place where you know you are living well and are most likely accomplishing what it is you are supposed to be accomplishing."

I don't believe happiness correlates with spiritual evolution or is an indication that you are on the right spiritual path. In fact I think this point of view is very harmful, for example, to people who have an illness like depression.

We incarnate for various reasons - to learn different lessons. If we were all happy we wouldn't learn nearly as much. We learn best by solving problems. If we were happy all the time we wouldn't recognize problems.

[Kris]

Hey Kevin

I don't like J.P Holdings tone a lot but he wrote the mother of all refutes of the Christ Myth and he thoroughly destroys it:

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexisthub.html

James Hannam also does a good job-

http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

In all seriousness as an academic idea the Christ Myth has a lot less support for it then does Young Earth Creationism.

[Kris]

Kevin

Remember in the end with Jesus's existence the claim is in the end one is arguing for a minor Messianic figure from the 1st century. That claims does not take much in the way of proof. And we have it from Josephus. Josephus mentions Jesus twice. The larger passage is disputed but the smaller one isn't. To historians without a blatant Atheist agenda that is enough.

Consider some of the details of the Biography Gospels.

a.) Jesus's family rejected him
b.) Jesus could not work miracles in certain areas cause of the disbelieve of those around him
c.) his brother tried to get him killed
d.) one of his closest followers betrayed him
e.) he did not know when his second coming would occur.

If he was just a construct how likely is it a construct would have those details?

Name any other religious movement without a founder.

How come no ancient historians considered him to be a myth.

I am not saying I believe every inch of the Bible or the NT for that matter but can you see why a Christ Myth is pretty much impossible.

"Name any other religious movement without a founder."

Spiritualism?

[steve wood]

If Jesus or (Isus) the Christ had only been a 'myth' (modern definition) the great religious and philosophical thinkers would have weeded it out by now.
Some mind/ voice composed the parables which in part, are at odds with the old testament(turn the other cheek ,for instance). The manner in which the author refers to himself as the son of man, is so specific,so odd, it rules out mere 'myth.'(in my humble opinion)
There is historical evidence aswell... St Paul etc.

[Kris]

Spiritualism certainly had a founder, it is just lost in history. And is spiritualism really a religious movement anyways?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiritualism

"Spiritualism is a monotheistic belief system or religion, postulating a belief in God, but the distinguishing feature is belief that spirits of the dead can be contacted, either by individuals or by gifted or trained "mediums", who can provide information about the afterlife.[1]

Spiritualism developed in the United States and reached its peak growth in membership from the 1840s to the 1920s, especially in English-language countries,[2][3] By 1897, it was said to have more than eight million followers in the United States and Europe,[4] mostly drawn from the middle and upper classes, while the corresponding movement in Latin speaking countries is known as Spiritism."

Also see:
http://www.nsac.org/

[Michael Prescott]

"Also, I am not nearly as sure as you seem to be that Doyle was duped by the Davenport brothers. I think this is another case in which the debunkers' theories, based upon their not understanding the nature of physical mediumship, became 'fact.'"

I'm not an expert on the Davenports, but everything I've read about them points to the conclsion that they were skilled escape artists. From the Prairie Ghosts article linked in the main post:

"The men began as entertainers and allowed a gullible public to think them to be more than that. Harry Kellar, the master magician, was employed by the Davenports for a time and afterwards learned to do tricks that altogether surpassed even the brothers' skills at rope-tying and escapes.

"The great secret of the Davenports' success lay in their uncanny (albeit natural) ability to extricate themselves from complex knots and ties and them return to them in record time. The most important part of the procedure took place during the binding, when they managed to obtain plenty of slack in the ropes by twisting, flexing and contorting their limbs. Once they relaxed, the ropes could be easily slipped out of.

"Years after they retired from the business, surviving brother Ira was interviewed and befriended by magician Harry Houdini. Davenport told Houdini that they never intended to become known as mediums but their almost supernatural powers came along during the early heyday of the Spiritualist movement and rather than turn down the money and appearances, they allowed the public to think whatever they wanted to about them. Davenport taught Houdini some of their best escapes and Houdini later used them and found them to be very effective and clever. He also discovered that the brothers rubbed oil into their hands so that they could slip out of the ropes more easily.

"They also employed as many as ten accomplices at a time and took great pains to hinder investigators and debunkers by placing traps in the aisles of the theater. That way, no one could sneak onto the stage during their séance and surprise them."

If this is accurate, it's pretty damning. I also recall that on one occasion an expert in rope-tying handled the binding of the two brothers. They were unable to produce any phenomena that day, and were run out of town by an angry mob!

Do you know of any reason to doubt these debunking claims?

[Michael Prescott]

"At this point a Christian in the group said, 'OH... now I understand. Yes, I can see why you feel that way now. But, since I have a relationship with Jesus Christ I don't have to worry about what will happen to me when I die and I can just enjoy life as it is.'

"I was dumbstruck -- and deeply hurt. All at once, my lifelong sense that I am here to develop into something more than I currently am was invalidated and I was also told (in so many words) that I was headed for hell, and ought to be quite disturbed about it."

I agree that the person could have meant this. But he might also have meant something more innocuous, like, "I'm not beset by doubts, because I have a personal relationship with Jesus, which assures me that I'll be okay." He may not have intended to imply that you were going to hell, only that he had found something that resolved his own doubts.

"Do you know of any reason to doubt these debunking claims?"

Who wrote it? Some skeptics are not reliable.

"I'm a charlatan, a liar, a thief, and a fake altogether."

With some skeptics you don't need a reason to doubt their claims you need a reason to believe them.

What do we know about what they said to Houdini, besides what Houdini said? Houdini was a professional debunker who debunked legitimate mediums.

I don't know what really happened but I'm not convinced when you have to ask "Why don't you believe this skeptic." If you want me to believe anything (paranormal or fraud) you have to prove it with more than hearsay.

For anyone interested here is a free e-book on the Davenport brothers:

http://www.spiritwritings.com/BiographyBrothersDavenport.pdf

[Akualele]

I often doubt because:

-I don´t have the full information

-I don´t trust the information that is given to me.

-I don´t trust the person who IS giving me the information.

-I sometimes doubt the evidence provided by my senses.,

-I doubt because I know for a fact that people often lie.

- I doubt because the information being provided to me lacks substantiation.

I doubt because sometimes the experience I have just had is incomprehensible.

It seems to me that doubt is often related to the amount of TRUST that we may or may not have acquired about anything that is important to us.

Which might imply that "uncertainty" is actually a very, very healthy state of mind. It contains the potential for movement toward or away from something. Whereas, "certainty" implies a place of rest, where discovery is no longer necessary, because their is no further motivation for clarity.

[william]

“Would anyone care to comment?”

If I were you at the place in life where you appear to be I would start with one of several approaches.

One purchase the book by Allan Kardec called the spirits book. After almost two decades of research into the mysteries of life that book agrees with about 90% of my findings. A somewhat Christian approach to spiritually but a worthwhile read.

One area of concern in that book is the word punishment for our karma. Karma is not about punishment but something else. Do research and find that something else. Also the God as painter analogy does not hold up to the infinite absolute of God, as it tends to make God in man’s image.

Next I would meditate on many of the questions and answers in this book. This blog you are on now is as good as any for finding other spiritual seekers knowledge and books to read. Happiness can be very elusive for anyone even a spiritual seeker, as sooner or later we have to look into the mirror and find that happiness is an inside job so to speak.

Being a true spiritual seeker is not for the faint of heart. There are lots of detours and frustrations and tons of misinformation on that journey but oh the rewards. Most of what you thought were truths are about 180 degrees from your new discoveries.

If you want comfort just buy into what others tell you is truth like a preacher but you do not appear to be that kind of person. I personally believe in a historical Jesus and much of what he stated but not all. Many of his parables and statements are spiritually profound that I have found few understand even today.

Like the meek shall inherit the earth and the rich man and camel story. Another story was created to avoid telling the rich that they may not be on a fast track to spiritual awareness or heaven. A spiritually aware person has no need or desire to be rich. Jesus understood this; few preachers or the rich or the want to be rich do. Of course being poor is not always a fast track to spiritual awareness either.

Best wishes on your journey.

Oh I started my spiritual search doing research on NDE’s as I was interested in finding out if a life existed beyond this life. My intellect told me there probably was not anything but this material world. NDE’s are a lovely encouraging start I think, but from my point of view only a start into this fascinating journey into the realm of these mysteries of life.

[Michael Prescott]

"purchase the book by Allan Kardec called the spirits book."

It's also online. Google kardec + spirits + book, and it will come up.

I was turned off by the early chapters, which present "scientific" information that doesn't seem to jibe with modern scientific knowledge, but perhaps I should take another look.

[Ulysses]

In reading Kardec’s The Spirits’ Book I would suggest to ignore the initial philosophical discussion on Deism vs. Pantheism (which was important at the time) and go directly to the Q&A section. Also, pay attention at the supposedly spirit answering the question. The best answers, in my opinion, come from the “Spirit of Truth”. Many other interesting answers come from “Socrates“. Others like “St. Louis” tend to focus more on the interpretation of Jesus teachings and Christianity. There are many questions that explain in detail how reincarnation works, how the Golden Rule and the Devine Justice are applied in specific cases, what happens to spirits that don’t know they are dead, and so on. And there is one where Kardec asks for a role model for humanity and the spirits simply answer “behold Jesus”, which explain why Spiritists consider Jesus as a moral authority for all; regardless of the specific religion or personal faith of each person. Also, note that free version on the Internet is the English translation by Ana Blackwell, which is not considered the best. There are better translations in amazon.com, but of course they cost some money.

"I was turned off by the early chapters, which present "scientific" information that doesn't seem to jibe with modern scientific knowledge, but perhaps I should take another look."

I'm not familiar with the details of the text but you have to take into account that the spirits have to communicate in terms that are current with the sitters or else they won't be understood. Then it was also translated from French to English so you have the possibility of obsolete scientific terms being translated incorrectly too.

Also, mediumship is not 100% accurate which I think you know - so you always have the problem that you have to use your judgment when you decide what to believe.

But I think the real key to assessing the reliability of the book is to find out who the mediums were and if they were "channelers" or evidential mediums. If they were able to give verifiable information in certain conditions the book is more credible than if they never gave anything that could be verified.

I couldn't find anything on that subject but I did find this:

http://www.spiritwritings.com/kardec.html

Biographic information from the Translators Preface by Anna Blackwell

" Foreseeing the vast importance, to science and to religion, of such an extension of the field of human observation, he entered at once upon a careful investigation of the new phenomena. A friend of his had two daughters who had become what are now called "mediums." They were gay, lively, amiable girls, fond of society, dancing, and amusement, and habitually received, when "sitting" by themselves or with their young companions, "communications" in harmony with their worldly and somewhat frivolous disposition. But, to the surprise of all concerned, it was found that, whenever he was present, the messages transmitted through these young ladies were of a very grave and serious character; and on his inquiring of the invisible intelligences as to the cause of this change, he was told that "spirits of a much higher order than those who habitually communicated through the two young mediums came expressly for him, and would continue to do so, in order to enable him to fulfill an important religious mission."

Much astonished at so unlooked-for an announcement, he at once proceeded to test its truthfulness by drawing up a series of progressive questions in relation to the various problems of human life and the universe in which we find ourselves, and submitted them to his unseen interlocutors, receiving their answers to the same through the instrumentality of the two young mediums, who willingly consented to devote a couple of evenings every week to this purpose, and who thus obtained, through table-rapping and planchette-writing, the replies which have become the basis of the spiritist theory, and which they were as little capable of appreciating as of inventing.

When these conversations had been going on for nearly two years, he one day remarked to his wife, in reference to the unfolding of these views, which she had followed with intelligent sympathy: "It is a most curious thing! My conversations with the invisible intelligences have completely revolutionized my ideas and convictions. The instructions thus transmitted constitute an entirely new theory of human life, duty, and destiny, that appears to me to be perfectly rational and coherent, admirably lucid and consoling, and intensely interesting. I have a great mind to publish these conversations in a book; for it seems to me that what interests me so deeply might very likely prove interesting to others.""

The material had an internal consistency that impressed Kardec who was well educated, was a teacher and in fact owned a school that he ran.

Then, you can also compare what the book says on subjects that has been discussed by other mediums and look for consistencies and discrepancies in what they say. Again you have to develop your own judgement on how to assess that type of comparison since we can't test the material scientifically (yet).

[Ulysses]

To be precise about why Spiritists considered themselves to be “Christians who believe in reincarnation”, the answer is in the Spirit’s Book Question 625 (Book Third, Chapter I)

625. What is the most perfect type that God has offered to man as his guide and model?
"Jesus."

[Sandy]

Michael,

I get your point that doubt is useful, but isn’t faith important too? I don’t have any doubts that death isn’t an ending. Being a NDEr just seems to take that doubt away. But I don’t know for sure what happens next other than that I’ll be OK. I have doubts about my other experiences. I don’t know if ghosts are dead people or if I somehow just use data to construct personalities to help me make sense of what I’m picking up on. I don’t know if my experiences with light since my NDE are real or if they are just something I need to help me survive the homesickness for the NDE place.

I’ve often thought that people who had faith were lucky. I don’t really need it because I KNOW that I’ll survive. My Grandma keeps telling me that faith is something everyone needs. Maybe it is just enough to have faith in one’s own self. That whatever happens, whatever the truth turns out to be, I’ll make the best of it and try to do the right thing.

[william]

“I was turned off by the early chapters, which present "scientific" information that doesn't seem to jibe with modern scientific knowledge, but perhaps I should take another look.”

I also will take another look perhaps I missed something. Equating God as a painter and the canvas as God’s creation missed an important point; there is no other to Oneness. Kardec I think missed the part about infinite Oneness cannot create anything outside its infinite Oneness. The Absolute must create within its Oneness.

But my suspicion is that maybe the Infinite is not doing all of this creation we see in the universe but “lesser gods” that use this Infinite as a Source of intelligence and vitality. In this scenario then indeed the painter analogy works for me.

There appears to be an evolution of consciousness occurring and if this is reality then where and when does this consciousness stop evolving. Seems to me we are gods in the making and these gods become profoundly creative as part of their process of advancing in divine awareness and cosmic consciousness. Meister Eckhart appeared to come to somewhat the same beliefs with his Godhead and a God with the Godhead as stillness and God as the creator.

Also one must always keep in mind we don’t know how much of this information in this book is Kardec’s, the mediums, or the spirits that come through the mediums. Also we don’t know for sure of the advanced status of the spirit. Kardec does an excellent job of explaining all of this in his intro.

But the way the human mind works it is so easy to insert our own beliefs and paradigms into our new incoming knowledge and information. The constant revision of the Christian bible is living proof of this phenomenon.

“The material had an internal consistency”

I agree with this analysis as I also saw this internal consistency. I really look for that consistency. An example is the book the conversations with god books I noticed several places of somewhat contradictory statements. But Kardec was a genius and he may have been able to spot any lack of consistency and make changes.

But I have also noticed that the conversations with God books are great books for a Christian to be introduced to many spiritual teachings.

I seem to remember that Kardec set out to debunk spiritualism and then become a profound believer. I have read that in Brazil 10% of the people are Spiritist and most have read the spirits book.

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

Regarding Doyle and the Davenport brothers, I had my wires crossed. I was mixing up the Eddy Brothers with the Davenport Brothers. I should have realized that the Eddy Brothers were well before Sir Arthur started investigating. I don't recall that much about the Davenport Brothers, but I would not base my conclusions about them on some current Internet site. So many of the current reports on mediums result from brief remarks here and there and charges of fraud suddenly become fact. In my blog post on ectoplasm which you kindly referenced last week, I talked about Eva C. and how some one-time visitors concluded she was a charlatan, while researchers who studied her countless times (Professor Gustave Geley, Dr. Albert Schrenck Notzing, Dr.Charles Richet)under test conditions were convinced she was for real. Yet, the one-time visitors' testimonies seem to be given equal weight in history with the much more informed researchers. And it should be kept in mind that neither Richet nor Schrenck Notzing would publicly accept the spirit hypothesis.

[Michael Prescott]

"I talked about Eva C. and how some one-time visitors concluded she was a charlatan, while researchers who studied her countless times (Professor Gustave Geley, Dr. Albert Schrenck Notzing, Dr.Charles Richet) under test conditions were convinced she was for real."

I have to admit I also think she was (probably) a charlatan. I wrote two essays about Eva C. here:

http://snipurl.com/t6yi9

http://snipurl.com/t6yie

I wrote these essays when I was a little more skeptical of physical mediumship than I am now, but I still think there are good reasons for doubting Eva C. -- not least of which are the photos Schrenck-Notzing took.

I agree that basing conclusions on Internet sites (including this one!) is a dangerous business, but I've found Prairie Ghosts to be quite reliable, and not uniformly skeptical by any means.

After all this time, we may never know the truth about the Davenports, but the writeups I've read point to the conclusion that they were very talented escape artists.

[Jeff]

Kevin,

Remember that the Bible is not one book. It's a collection of books. The Gospels themselves are four separate books...and Luke, a gentile, wasn't even one of the original apostles. As for Roman records, Paul, whose writings take up a significant portion of the NT, was a Roman citizen. Bear in mind, there are also apocryphal books written by different authors that mention Jesus too.

With that in mind...just how many different sources would you need to be convinced?

[william]

“With that in mind...just how many different sources would you need to be convinced?”

Whether Jesus existed or did not exist, his parables and teachings ring true as to a spiritual reality not just a materialistic reality. I happen to believe he existed for a variety of reasons. His remarks are what some would term enlightened remarks.

As far as Jesus being the most advanced spirit to walk on earth as a human maybe so maybe not. The spirits in the spirit book were very much Christian in their beliefs. Many claimed to be former Christian saints.

The hardest part of a study in spiritualism is to know that because a spirit is speaking from the other side does not make it valid and perfect truth or truths.

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

You say you dismissed Eva C. based primarily on the photos Schrenck-Notizing took. Now that you have learned a little more about physical mediumship, can you accept those photos as failed attempts at materialization, as the researchers came to understand? If not, you must think Schrenck-Notzing, Richet, and Geley were complete idiots to accept such manifestatons as real. Why would Schrenck-Notzing waste his time through 180 sittings with her after seeing such manifestations in the first few sittings? Geley and Richet had several dozen sittings with her and saw those manifestations early on. Why would some medium think that she could fool people with something as ridiculous-looking as most of those photos show?

I think the same goes for the Helen Duncan manifestation you referenced a year or two ago. It looked like one of those balloon-type dolls that kids use for punching bags.
I know you cited some testimony about Helen Duncan being a fraud, but I think the evidence for her far outweighs the evidence against her. Whether she was a "mixed" medium like Eusapia is said to be -- producing genuine phenomena at times and faking it at other times when her powers failed her is the only question in my mind.
But then the question turns to whether it was conscious fraud or unconscious fraud, if the latter can actually be called "fraud."

[sonic]

An excellent idea for a book.

[Michael Prescott]

"I know you cited some testimony about Helen Duncan being a fraud, but I think the evidence for her far outweighs the evidence against her."

She may have been a legitimate mental medium. I think Harry Price's photos of Duncan's "ectoplasm" clearly show that the stuff extruding from her mouth was cheesecloth. You can even see the stitches. Price also said Duncan's maid confessed to laundering the cheesecloth after every performance. Price might have been lying about that (who knows?), but the photos don't lie.

My guess about Eva C. is that she and Juliette Bisson carried out an elaborate fraud together. I go into some detail about this in the second essay linked in my earlier comment. The essay also mentions that highly incriminating photos of Eva C. (showing clear evidence of fraud) were taken by Geley but not published until after his death. Furthermore, when Eva C. was investigated by different researchers who insisted on tighter controls and minimized Bisson's involvement, the phenomena produced were minimal.

The incomplete manifestation theory may be correct in some cases, but when the alleged manifestations are so obviously puppets or pictures from the newspaper, I think fraud is the likeliest explanation. One of Eva C.'s materialized faces was identical to a portrait in the newspaper, and part of the newspaper banner on the back of the page was visible. She or Bisson must have cut it out of the newspaper and smuggled it into the séance room.

I wouldn't call the researchers "complete idiots," but I do think they were caught up in an exciting, dramatic situation that simply got out of hand.

"She may have been a legitimate mental medium. I think Harry Price's photos of Duncan's "ectoplasm" clearly show that the stuff extruding from her mouth was cheesecloth."

http://www.victorzammit.com/book/4thedition/chapter11.html

"Throughout the war years Helen Duncan reunited many grieving relatives with servicemen who had died. At one such séance at Portsmouth in 1941 a sailor materialized and was reunited with his mother. He told the assembled sitters that his ship, HMS Barham, had recently been sunk. The editor of the Psychic News, Maurice Barbanell, innocently telephoned the British Admiralty to enquire whether this was true and if it was true why the Admiralty had not advised the sailor's mother about the loss of her son. The military intelligence was furious because for security reasons and for public morale, news of the sinking had been withheld and had been classified 'top secret'.

National Security thought that a medium of Helen Duncan's caliber could very easily get hold of the most secretly held information: where the Allies were going to land in Europe on D. Day. One can understand the concern of the Admiralty for secrecy of such an important event.

But one cannot understand the way the Admiralty dealt with a frail woman, who had six children and a disabled husband to support, by sending her to jail for nine months causing her family to be evicted from the family home. "

How can cheese cloth reveal national security secrets?

Maybe the fraud was perpetrated by the skeptic not the medium.

Will Goldston was a leading magic trick seller, wrote over 30 books on conjuring

http://www.survivalafterdeath.org.uk/articles/goldston/duncan.htm

Now, there is not, so far as I am aware - and I am a magician of lifelong experience - any system of trickery which can achieve the astounding results which I witnessed that evening with Mrs. Duncan.

Nor am I aware of any system of ventriloquism or voice control which can so perfectly simulate the voices of eight different beings. After the sitting Mrs. Duncan repaired in my company to an adjoining room. There, with me, she drank two cups of coffee and ate two tea cakes. I am not sufficiently a medical man to know to what extent the power of regurgitation may be developed in the human subject, but I should be more than a little surprised if it were at all possible to absorb food and drink into the stomach that is already packed with cheese cloth.

...

My next sitting with Mrs. Duncan was, as far as I was concerned, purely in the nature of a test séance. I had enlisted with me as co-examiners Henry Rigoletto, Dr. A. E. Neale, and Dr. O. H. Bowen. All three are magicians of the widest experience.

Previous to the sitting Mrs. Duncan had been stripped, examined, and entirely reclothed by two ladies who were present with us the whole evening, and who, we were given to understand, were strangers to her. For our part, we could find nothing in the room, or, more particularly, in the cabinet, which gave us grounds for suspicion.

My own seat was about two feet from the cabinet. A dim red lamp was used for illumination, sufficient for me to see the curtains clearly and the outline of the medium.

The forms manifested on this second occasion were, I thought, a little lacking in clearness and power. Nevertheless, they were essentially of the same type - that is, shining with a curious phosphorescent sheen in the ruby light and entirely self-luminous. I was, and still am, completely at a loss to explain their appearance and disappearance by any material means.

"How can cheese cloth reveal national security secrets?

Maybe the fraud was perpetrated by the skeptic not the medium."

When you have the national security apparatus behind you it is called "disinformation" and it goes far beyond the penny-ante fraud that we come to expect from professional skeptics.

When a medium does spirit photography, (taking pictues of spirits that are not visible to the naked eye but show up when the film is devleoped), people who care about the truth insist that the cameras be prepared by an independent investigator (not the medium), and the film be developed by a independent investigator, and if the camera is handled by the medium it is in controlled conditions where it is continuously visible to an independent investigator.

When a debunker offers pictures of alleged fraud the same strict controls over the cameras and film have to be observed.

Who took these pictures of alleged fraud (cheese cloth and the doll) by Helen Duncan? I don't think they are offerd by the medium as proof of her powers. They were taken by a debunker (Price?) right? If that is correct, then who loaded the film and who developed the pictures? What assurance do we have that they were not faked?

[steve wood]

On Michael's opening comments, before Darwin put an end(at least for the intellectuals etc) to the Religious interpretation of how the world began, dates etc, wasn't it the case that the majority of people believed in life after death. Certainly it is an archetype that is found in nearly every civilisation, even in the the most isolated 'tribes.'
So, on the point that one hundred per-cent certainty of L after D being not healthy, haven't we already had that.

I remember the collapse of peoples confidence in religion, the sixties particularly, with all the promise of new inventions, space travel etc. I remember the arguments my religious mother had with my forward looking father. The barely repressed contempt he had for her belief in the human soul and God. Much merriment was had at the dinner table at her expense but when Moody's book appeared, less so.
The concept of the soul was back in fashion.

Now, can the Aware study settle it once and for all. If it does, I don't think the world will change much as a result. I would hope that it would... but the sacred text of Parnia's positive results could still be destroyed and then we would only have the word of people that 'heard' about it.

[Michael Prescott]

"Who took these pictures of alleged fraud (cheese cloth and the doll) by Helen Duncan?"

Harry Price. The plates are online:

http://snipurl.com/t7agt

Plates 21, 22, and 24 are particularly clear.

Price has been accused of misconduct in the Borley Rectory case and in his investigation of Rudi Schneider, and he was certainly a publicity hound and a "tricksterish" character. So it's possible to doubt his claims about Duncan. But the photo themselves are awfully damning, and even Duncan never accused Price of faking them, as far as I know.

"How can cheese cloth reveal national security secrets?"

Maybe Duncan was a legitimate mental medium and obtained the info that way. She may have supplemented mental mediumship with physical effects for commercial reasons.

"Now, can the Aware study settle it once and for all."

I doubt it. Even if the AWARE study gets positive results, it will be possible to argue that it's evidence for ESP, but not for life after death.

"wasn't it the case that the majority of people believed in life after death.... So, on the point that one hundred per-cent certainty of L after D being not healthy, haven't we already had that."

That's a great point. Maybe I should say that the sudden attainment of such certainty in our modern world, when we aren't ready for it, can be problematic.

[Eric Lyman]

Thank you for this post, it is quite interesting! I've wrestled with doubt myself quite a bit- not about life after death but more esoteric things that I won't list here.

On the topic of life after death, one thing I've noticed when I compare my belief system to others is that everyone has their own unique level of required proof in order to believe something. For example, the books authored by Michael Newton on the afterlife are more than sufficient evidence for me to believe that the afterlife exists without question. I offered the material to an athiest friend of mine who took one look and then exclaimed... "Yeah, but these are just people talking! That's not proof!"

Where does this level of proof that is unique to each come from? I can only speculate on this by dipping in to the esoteric. My belief is that each person comes to Earth with a set of goals to accomplish, life lessons if you will. Not believing in your own immortality has tremendous potential to act as catalyst for a person. And for someone else who may have completely different goals in life, it may not be much catalyst at all.

"Price has been accused of misconduct in the Borley Rectory case and in his investigation of Rudi Schneider, and he was certainly a publicity hound and a "tricksterish" character. So it's possible to doubt his claims about Duncan."

Why is it that skeptics trust debunkers of questionable veracity when those same skeptics are so quick to reject psychics, psychical researchers, and parapsychologists as fakers? It creates the impression they are not interested in truth but in confirming their own bias.

Also, I am wondering why, if Helen Duncan swallowed and regurgitated her props why there was no smell of vomit in the seance room or cabinet? Price says the cheese cloth smelled like gorgonzola cheese. (http://www.harryprice.co.uk/Seance/Duncan/leaves-duncan.htm) which smells like old shoes ( http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-gorgonzola.htm ). I don't know what gorgonzola smells like, but my old shoes don't smell like vomit.

I also have several questions about Price's description of the seances, such as how the ectoplasm was made to move in the way he described it, who he thinks made the voices, why he didn't gag the medium to stop her from making the voices and regurgitating etc.

[Michael Prescott]

"why he didn't gag the medium to stop her from making the voices and regurgitating"

The ectoplasm supposedly emerged from Duncan's throat, so gagging her would have prevented any materializations. Besides, Price was interested in photographing the ectoplasm.

I don't know why people are so keen on defending Duncan when there are so many better mediums who don't carry her baggage.

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

We can go around and around in circles on the mediumship of Eva C., Helen Duncan, and Eusapia Paladino and perhaps even David Thompson and not get anywhere. There are so many peculiarities about physical mediumship that cannot be proved and remain subject to debate. Take a look at some of the web sites for Jack Webber and you will see that the ectoplasm flowing from him also looks like cheesecloth. So what if it looks like cheesecloth and has seams in it? That doesn't mean it is cheesecloth. It is well established that it comes in many forms. Then again, perhaps Jack Webber was also a charlatan.

It is my understanding that Juliette Bisson was not present at the laboratory testing of Eva C. done by Professor Geley, or at least not at all of them. They were accomplished in his university laboratory and as he said there was no possibility of fraud. If you haven't read Geley's reports, I suggest you do so. But still, the person whose mind is made up will conclude that Geley must have been prejudiced in some way or a poor observer.

It is also well established that the sitters contribute to the phenomena with their own "psychic force" and that a negative attitude can defeat phenomena. Such seems to have been the case with the Irish medium Kathleen Goligher, who produced much phenomena observed by Dr. William Crawford and also witnessed by Sir William Barrett. Yet, when a much more skeptical researcher attempted to confirm what Crawford had reported on and even photographed, almost nothing happened. The researcher's negativity may have prevented the harmony necessary to produce the phenomena. Of course, the skeptic can only smirk at such a reason. In the case of Eva C. it may be that Bisson's psychic force added to that of Eva C. and gave enough power to produce the partial materializations.

The fact seems to be that Eva C. was not a very powerful medium as there were very few complete materializations witnessed with her. Richet witnessed a near-complete materialization with no legs (Bien Boa), but, of course, there are various debunking theories related to this materialization. The person who doesn't want to believe will accept the debunking theories, while the objective observer will consider them but will also consider all the other factors that enter into the complexity of mediumship.

In the end, it is the cumulative evidence coming from many mediums and researchers that means the most to me. Again, I would ask what the point would be of reguritating cheesecloth? What are the spiritual implications of such a vulgar act? Certainly, there must have been more sensible ways of duping people.

As for the magazine print that seemed to have materialized, the thought-transference aspect of materialization may have accounted for that. The magazine print had no meaning in the manifestation, so what would be the point of using it?

Nothing can be proved with absolute certainty one way or the other, and so we come back to the question of doubt, which is what this post started out addressing. If the evidence were more clear, we might not doubt when it appears that doubt is good thing.

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

I meant to make one more point. Why would Helen Duncan and Eva C. have to bother with ectoplasm? Why not just blow up the balloons or produce the fake manifestations without ectoplasm? It was all in the dark and nobody could see anyway. Why introduce an unnecessary element, especially one that causes so much controversy? Does it just add to the mystery of it all and make for a better magic show?

[william]

Research into spiritualism indeed the mysteries of life are not for the faint of heart. There is something there but it is not without its fraud, beliefs, naiveté, skepticism, and ultra skepticism. I believe anything an ultra skeptic or debunker has to say about as much as anyone that holds up their cherished book and tells his followers this is a book of truth and every word in this book is truth.

To deny everything is as foolish as to accept everything. I have met and dialoged with both types of people.

“My belief is that each person comes to Earth with a set of goals to accomplish, life lessons if you will”

This view appears to cross validate very well with much of my research into the mysteries of life. I suspect new souls just come crashing onto the earth scene and older souls take more time in planning out certain fates they would like to enter into their lives to advance in love, compassion, and divine intelligence.

Would the earth be more of a compassionate place to live if we better understood these mysteries of life such as the possibility of old souls and new souls and all levels of soul development in between?

We appear to be in soul clusters or soul groups that expand out from the center of our intimate small group. In the past few years this soul group reality has become increasingly evident to me for a variety of personal reasons.

It is of interest to me that with Newton’s work he never found a Hades condition on the other side. With spiritualism and NDE’s there appears to be a Hades condition or environment not as punishment but it represents the consciousness of the person after they cross over.

One possible explanation may be that the people that come to see a person like Newton are at a level of consciousness that Hades does not exist for such a person. From my point of view the jury is still out on life between life hypnosis but I also think this research will become beneficial in the future. There may be great potential with a robust design of experiments for possible evidence that this type of research can move from subjective evidence to qualitative evidence.

[Michael Prescott]

"If you haven't read Geley's reports, I suggest you do so."

I haven't read them in full, but I have read Brian Inglis' discussion of them in "Science and Parascience," which I summarized in the second of my two essays on Eva C., linked above. Here are the relevant paragraphs from my essay:

-----

One of the strongest reports in Marthe's favor was issued by Gustave Geley, a researcher who claimed to have seen "a substance at first amorphous or polymorphous [exuding from] the natural orifices [with] a crawling reptilian movement" and producing fingers, hands, and "a living head, whose bones I could feel under a thick mass of hair ... Here and there from the mass appear temporary protrusions, and these for a few seconds assume the form of fingers, the outline of hands, and then re-enter the mass ... I can see then the extremity thicken like a swelling, and this terminal swelling expands into a perfectly modelled hand. I touch it; it gives a normal sensation. I feel the bones, and the fingers with their nails. Then the hand contracts, diminishes and disappears in the end of the cord. The cord makes a few movements, retracts, and returns to the medium's mouth."

In summary, Geley announced, "I do not say 'There was no trickery.' I say 'There was no possibility of trickery.'" (Quoted in Science and Parascience)

This certainly sounds definitive. After Geley's death, however, his investigation was called into question when, as Inglis recounts, a researcher named Osty "found some photographs which appeared to show that some of the materialisations had been faked -- attached to her by threads, or wires. He showed them to some psychical researchers, but did not publish them; on the advice, he claimed, of Schrenck[-Notzing] and [Charles] Richet. Thirty years later Rudolf Lambert, a German who had been a psychical researcher in the 1920s, explained what happened ... According to Lambert, Osty had shown him the photographs but pledged him to secrecy about them on the ground that it would be disastrous if the story [got out. The consensus formed that the] photographs Osty had found must surely have shown that the phenomena had been faked. All the research carried out with Marthe Beraud in her role as 'Eva C.,' it was assumed, must be set aside as discredited."

Inglis is careful to make the point that other suspicious-looking photos of Marthe's ectoplasmic manifestations had been published by Bisson, Schrenck-Notzing, and Geley (including the MIRO picture), so there was nothing necessarily incriminating about Geley's decision to withhold these particular photos. Nevertheless, as Inglis acknowledges, "the outcome... was that 'Eva C.' was effectively discredited in psychical research circles, along with her investigators." (Science and Parascience)

------

End of quote. Inglis, of course, was not a skeptic and does his best to present Eva C. in a positive light.

But the bottom line is that Geley had photos of threads or wires holding up the materializations, which he chose to conceal. How credible, then, are his eyewitness reports? Even if we think the threads or wires were ectoplasmic (a doubtful assumption), shouldn't the photos at least have been made part of the official record? How can we trust anything Geley said if he withheld this information?

"So what if it looks like cheesecloth and has seams in it? That doesn't mean it is cheesecloth."

The Harry Price photos show stitching along the edge of the "ectoplasm." This kind of stitching, called selvage, is found in manufactured cloth. Moreover, one photo shows Helen Duncan disgorging a spirit hand that looks like an empty rubber glove - which is attached to the "ectoplasm" by a very visible safety pin!

"Why would Helen Duncan and Eva C. have to bother with ectoplasm?"

I think some physical mediums are genuine, and ectoplasm may well be part of the phenomenon. The fakes would then have to duplicate this effect by whatever means are available.

"I don't know why people are so keen on defending Duncan when there are so many better mediums who don't carry her baggage."

I think sloppy debunking is fair game. People are too quick to accept a debunker's word. The critical thinking skills people are so quick to apply to mediums seem to go out the window when considering the claims of a debunker. I think this is a problem for the field.

[Michael Tymn]

Michael,

I am aware of the alleged photos that Geley had showing threads and wires, but I have yet to see any documentary evidence of it. Thus, it is hearsay. It is like the hearsay evidence that came up with Sir William Crookes after he died that he was having an affair with Florence Cook, the medium involved in the Katie King materializations. In a court of law, the direct evidence far outweighs the hearsay evidence, if the latter is considered at all. That is why I have little faith in Internet sources. They give the hearsay evidence and specualtions that have mounted over the years equal weight with the direct evidence. There is hardly any story in the history of mediumship, if any, that does not have some hearsay "evidence" or speculation designed to refute the direct evidence.

I'm still curious as to why you think those mediums would assume that the weird, strange, funny materializations, however they be labeled, would fool people. Do you assume that they were all -- pardon the expression -- "dumb blonds"? Were they real clever on the one hand and very stupid on the other? I just can't imagine that anyone would think she or he could pass off some of those things as spirit manifestations. The failed or incomplete materialization explanation makes much more sense to me than the idea that anyone could be that stupid.

I think I recommended it before -- "Intention and Survival" by T. Glen Hamilton, M.D., the Canadian psychical researcher. He has dozens of photos of those weird materializations in his book and there is no doubt in his mind that they are not faked. They are all with Canadian mediums, not Eva C. or Helen.