Blog powered by Typepad

« Dancing in the dark | Main | The VR thing »


I have to give Professor Braude credit for sticking with physical mediamship the way he has. I think that Professor Braude is a good guy but maybe a little too willing to accept certain physical phenomena and certain people if he has a good relationship with them. I think he tends to be defensive and somewhat argumentative with people he has run-ins with when it might be better to just let it go. In his book Gold Leaf Lady he wrote way too much about his bad relationships with several people and gave way too much personal information about his wife and her interests and past history.

I am not happy with the way he treated Patience Worth in his book Immortal Remains. I know he has given some thought to the Patience Worth case because he has taken some of her poems and reparsed them. I think that he appreciates the literary quality of her work. He rather flips her off in that book because he believes that no evidence that she lived in England has been found nor did she leave behind any of her work that she may have written when she lived in England or the Colonies. I have addressed these issues at:

and at:

I don't think that he thought out the Patience Worth case very well and because he gave her short-shrift I find it difficult to warm up to him in anything else he writes. Other than that, I recommend that his book Immortal Remains is a good one to read. He has some interesting accounts of organ transplant cases which I have not seen anywhere else. - AOD

"physical and materialization mediumship, areas that have historically been plagued with fraud and ambiguity. For several decades the Society for Psychical Research largely refused to conduct any investigations into such claims, having found that virtually all cases they did examine proved fraudulent."

Hi Michael,
That isn't the case with the phenomena detailed in the Scole Report (I'm sure you know) and investigated by SPR members over several years. No fraud detected at all and reproduction of some of these would require holographic tactile electronic equipment (not invented now or then - the 1990's) operated under the noses of the investigators.

I was referring to earlier decades, when the SPR was run by Eleanor Sidgwick (roughly 1908-1931). Sidgwick was staunchly opposed to spending the Society's limited resources on the investigation of physical or materialization mediums.

The SPR did reluctantly relax its policy during that time to investigate Eusapia Palladino, but she was caught cheating (as she was wont to do when not properly controlled).

The SPR's American counterpart, the ASPR, investigated Mina Crandon, who gained some loyal defenders among their membership. When Crandon was discredited in a scandal, it caused a serious rift in the organization.

The Scole case was much more recent, but while the Scole Report issued by SPR investigators was mostly positive, many other people have raised doubts about the case. The biggest red flag is that shortly before infrared photography was due to be introduced into the seances, the "spirits" abruptly called a halt to the proceedings.

Well, I read about 80% of it. :)

What is with these mediums? They seem to have an almost pathological need to cheat so as to discredit themselves in a self-destructive way. This guy gets caught with some light-producing doodad on his thumb--lame!

I mean, even if they are running along producing legit phenomena, they almost seem to *want* to get caught doing something, even something small, so as to give Skeptics the ability to deny *everything.*


The Scole "Experimenters" wasted their time by not taking their talents to Hollywood. Some of the stuff is just WTH? Here for instance, is the "Scole Dude" What is this, a puppet?

OK in respect of past cases ...

"many other people have raised doubts about the case. The biggest red flag is that shortly before infrared photography was due to be introduced into the seances, the "spirits" abruptly called a halt to the proceedings."

With respect, the principal investigators, Keen, Fontana, Ellison thought there were real unexplained phenomena.
I see Scole as A or B, real or false, there's no in-between. And given the massive range of phenomena, esp. the lights, B is out. I just think we must face this utterly head on.

I know I've said this here before, but I know - without a shadow of a doubt - that at least some of the Scole material is genuine because I've experienced the light phenomena myself on several occasions.

It's impossible to doubt what one has experienced - separately and independently - when it coincides with the findings of other apparently sensible and intelligent people.

Matt what I think happens in or during a reading is that the Mediums get just brief glimpses of information and then they feel the need to stretch is out into a half hour or an hour reading and so they have to come up with a lot of filler - much like many novels I've read where the author has a pretty good story but if he put in book form it would only be a short story so they add a whole bunch of filler trying to stretch it out into a full length novel. A good portion of most readings I've actually seen on TV and watched on youtube is "filler" - stretching out just a few good hits into a full 50 minute reading.

Much like my post.

Troubling. I'm highly skeptical of mediums and psychics of any variety, but especially physical mediums. Overwhelmingly one is more likely to encounter a full-fledged fraud than anything approaching real.

On the other hand, I have sat twice with someone who I am convinced is a real medium (albeit not a physical medium), and of high caliber at that. Others here know of this medium and are also impressed. Yet others here still say she is a dud or even a fake.

I am sure physical spirit phenomena can be real because there are some very well documented poltergeist cases and I have personally experienced it in my own home for a period of a few months at a level that defeated all null hypotheses that I advanced.

I wanted to have Kai and the Scole group be real and I followed them as closely as possible when they first started making news. One of the early effects that made me think they are phonies is the appearance of apports as little religious amulets within wax balls (about the size of a golf ball - you open the wax ball and inside is a little statue of Ganesh or such). Why the wax balls? It doesn't fit. It seems like some necessity for a magician, but not a spirit that can apport objects. That kind of detail, even though seemingly innocuous should be registered and assessed. Now we have lights on finger tips.

Sure Braude may have been impressed by some effects surrounding Kai. Unfortunately that is easy to explain as him just not having caught onto all of the tricks yet.

Sad. Sad and troubling.


I think you are indeed correct.


Right! "Well, they prep these thingies in wax at the Aport Dispensary for easier passage through the ether!"

Personally, I have yet to hear of an aport that sounded legit to me, though I wouldn't rule out the possibility totally.

"I see Scole as A or B, real or false, there's no in-between."

I have not followed the Scole experiments, but that is clearly wrong, because although the Scole experiments are not fraud, it may are not manifestations of spirits of the deceased, or may be, but the fact is that that is not a dichotomy.

"I know I've said this here before, but I know - without a shadow of a doubt - that at least some of the Scole material is genuine because I've experienced the light phenomena myself on several occasions."

But what does it mean that some of the Scole material is genuine apart from being an anomaly? It is not enough to conclude that something anomalous happens, but we have to find out if it are manifestations of the spirits of deceased humans.

"Eric Newhill (formerly 'no one')"

No one is now someone!

It just goes to prove that with hard work, perseverance, and a can-do attitude, anybody can become somebody.


"It just goes to prove that with hard work, perseverance, and a can-do attitude, anybody can become somebody. "

Only in America!

"Eric Newhill (formerly 'no one')"

Excellent. Now I can slip into the anonymity I've always craved.

-- no one (formerly Bruce Siegel)

I don't recall much, if any, evidence of survival in the Scole Report.

"Personally, I have yet to hear of an aport that sounded legit to me, though I wouldn't rule out the possibility totally."

Well, apports happen regularly in poltergeist cases, often in full light and in front of many witnesses.

"I don't recall much, if any, evidence of survival in the Scole Report."

Or any alleged physical mediumship for that matter.

"-- no one (formerly Bruce Siegel)"

Enjoy :-)

LOL, Michael, Eric, Bruce...

"-- no one (formerly Bruce Siegel"

Please use initial caps, to avoid confusion when referring to you!

There's plenty of good evidence in physical mediumship. People like Kai Muegge and Gary Manion are hardly representative.

Eric said,

||Well, apports happen regularly in poltergeist cases, often in full light and in front of many witnesses.||

Hadn't known that. That would be stuff essentially teleporting within the house, no? I find that pretty plausible.

What I don't find extremely plausible is spirits producing special objects for sitters in a seance. Or rather, when I've read about actual cases, the objects produced sounded awfully suspicious/cheesy/generic/etc. I've never read about a *specific* object that only the sitter could have owned being aported (which would be impressive) or an other-worldly object being aported (like a moon rock or something, which would be mind-blowing). It's always been small, cheap, easily obtained junk, like coins or religious medals, etc. But I could be wrong!

Many people think that the best evidence of physical mediumship was Eusapia palladino, but Wiseman debunked the Feildind Report (and others Reports too):

01 - (wiseman)

02 - (mary rose barrington to wiseman)

03 - (fontana to wiseman)

04 - (wiseman to mary)

05 - (wiseman to fontana)

06 - (alfonso martínez taboa and margarita francia to wiseman)

07 - (wiseman to alfonso martínez taboas and margarita francia)

08 - (mary rose barrington again)

09 - (fontana again)

10 - (wiseman to mary rose barrington and fontana again)

11 - (alfonso martinez taboas and margarita francia again)

Is that the one where Wiseman speculated that an unknown accomplice somehow sneaked into the dimly lit hotel room and did all kinds of mischief without being detected by the investigators, even though they used lamps to illuminate the underside of the table and even took photos of the levitations?

I tried "tried to debunk" would be a more accurate description.

Wiseman has an exceptionally poor reputation even among other Skeptics.

Without evidence of an accomplice, Wiseman in no way "debunked' the Feilding Report. He can blather-on as much as he wants and argue on ad infinitum but what evidence did he provide? NONE!

I agree that he "tried to debunk" the report but failed miserably. Anyone could claim a accomplice to explain every example of physical phenomena exhibited during a séance. I can't even read through these kinds of theories anymore so I am not inclined to even consider any of them at all. My tact is to go back to the original documents, if available, describing what was seen or heard at a séance by reputable people and then make up my own mind. - AOD

"It's always been small, cheap, easily obtained junk, like coins or religious medals, etc. But I could be wrong!" - Matt


I brought up poltergeists b/c they demonstrate that psychokinetic movement of objects is possible. Furthermore, in very well documented cases with many credible witnesses, objects have appeared in the house that weren't originally in it; for example rocks falling all over the house, sometimes many at once, where the rocks appeared to be from somewhere outside the house. In the Enfield case the rocks were even seen to materialize out of thin air before falling to the ground. I would call that a true apport.

Otherwise, completely agreed re; "physical mediumship". Why not apport some meaningful object from childhood? Say the spirit of a deceased parent delivering a toy that was given to the sitter for Christmas long ago. Or, as you say, a moon rock or a valuable diamond. But that never happens. Just generic junk.

For what it's worth, I'll share an apport story from four years ago when my wife and I were experiencing some phenomena in the months subsequent to my father's passing.

My wife and I were lying in bed watching a movie on the TV. The only light on in the room was the bedside lamp. We owned that lamp for many years and still do. It had never malfunctioned in any way prior to the event that will be described and has not since. It is not on a dimmer switch. It's either on or off.

So we're lying there and the lamp suddenly dimmed itself to about half the light output it normally produces. The effect was exactly like a light that is on a dimmer switch being deliberately turned down slowly and then slowly being brought back up to normal output intensity. The cycle from normal output, 1/2 output, back to normal took maybe 2 seconds. In the midst of the dimming there was a sound of small object hitting the nightstand. I thought I saw something falling from the ceiling, but wasn't sure. My wife did see the object fall. She said it was a "nut". I looked at the nightstand and there was a single pistachio sitting on it. My Dad loved pistachios.

So that is why I personally believe that apports can be real. That and the poltergeist evidence.

One more point about the pistachio - the fact that it was sitting on the nightstand was weird. I tested it. Dropping it from various heights, if over more than a foot or so, it would bounce off the nightstand and onto the floor. This was 100% true if it hit with enough velocity to produce the same impact sound that I heard originally. Sticking to the nightstand seems to be physically impossible.

01 - "Is that the one where Wiseman speculated that an unknown accomplice somehow sneaked into the dimly lit hotel room and did all kinds of mischief without being detected by the investigators, even though they used lamps to illuminate the underside of the table and even took photos of the levitations?"
Yes. The most problem for me is that I don't think the Feilding report is a reliable source. Much thing that you read was wrote days or even years after the session, and Wiseman shows the contradictions.
02 - "Wiseman has an exceptionally poor reputation even among other Skeptics."

This is new for me. Who are the skeptics which dislike Wiseman? The only critic to him by a skeptic that I know was published in an article about Ganzfeld in 2005 called "Finding and Correcting Flawed Research Literatures", which we find:

"Milton andWiseman (1999) employed a rather puzzling form of meta-analysis. They reviewed 30 studies and weighted each study equally (i.e., unweighted procedure), rather than the widely accepted procedure of weighting each study by the study’s sample size (i.e., weighted procedure). Thus, one study that ran only 4 pairs of subjects received the same weighting in the overall Effect Size (ES) as did another that tested 100 pairs. Using the more common weighted procedure, the mean ES more than
doubled from .013 to .028."

A thing people might like, if they haven't seen it already:
I would love to see people here respond to a couple of critical articles about this I've seen. I think the original's pretty on point.

I don't remember the medium but the apport was fresh lilacs from the garden. The following comment about them was that they lasted the "normal period of time about two weeks." Now anyone who has cut lilacs and placed them in a vase of water knows that lilacs are one of the flowers that don't last very long when they are cut. Often they wilt in a few hours and certainly don't last longer than one or two days. When I read reports such as this I just want to groan, knowing that somebody is exaggerating or not telling the truth making it difficult to believe anything he or she says. - AOD

It's difficult to know if the falling pistachio and dimming light had any thing to do with your father's spirit being freed from bondage in a body. But it makes an interesting story. How soon after the event/apport did he die?

I guess I would have to ask if you had any other pistachios in the house. Even if you did it would be difficult to understand that any of them would be dropping out of the air onto a bedside table and not bouncing off as you say. Of course you or your wife may have forgotten that you were eating pistachios in bed a day or two before the 'apport'. I'm not questioning your memory but I would have to ask.

I think most of us want to hang on to stories such as yours. It sort of attenuates the grief of a loved one's passing, something to bolster the belief that he or she may have survived. It's similar to my grandfather turning on the bedside lamp and TV when I returned from hospice care where he was dying. I will never know if he really did that or not. It is comforting to think that he might have but as the years go by I believe less and less that he did. - AOD

I just wanted to say that on the grand scale of things, the relationships we had with people living on earth may not be the same in the 'hereafter'. I mean that while living we may think that we love our parents, children or spouse, but from the afterlife perspective the spirit may understand that what was perceived as love was something else like domination, control or other subtle negative ways we all relate to one another under the guise of 'love'. I have often thought that maybe that is why there is not more communication from relatives I 'loved' in the hereafter. That is, maybe they clearly see how their relationship with me affected my life (as I now do) and although I 'loved' them and they 'loved' me they might realize that it is time to let me go on my own way and not interfere---not communicate.

And of course, relationships , that is, parent, spouse, child are not indelible or remain forever. In another life our relationship may be completely different. A son may become a husband. A child may become a neighbor etc.

It may also be that it is time for those I 'loved' to go onto other things too and not be bound to an earth life or to me. Obviously if they have reincarnated then communication from the spirit world would be a moot point as they would be living another life on earth or elsewhere. - AOD

Having experienced the dimmer light in my bedroom (which was off) suddenly turn on and quickly bring the room into full light. As well as other phenomena, I think they have no trouble manipulating matter.

What I sometimes wonder though, is whether they have a bit of fun at other times. Here's a few examples, I marvel at the perfection of an outcome.

I was in a lift recently and putting on a heavy chained silver bracelet, standing in the far corner of the lift. The chain dropped, bounced (how does a chain bounce) and went straight down the lift. I couldn't believe how it bounced.

I remember as kids we were playing cricket on the road verge. One of the guys hit the ball, and his mum who was across the road 200 metres away, behind a fence and bent over the garden. Got it fair on the butt and nose dived into the garden. I mean you couldn't even plan it. Ha ha.

Lyn x.

Bit upset at the moment because an NDE site I was poking through also had a section on anti-vax bull. I'm autistic, and there are no words for how offended I am by people who on one hand preach love and acceptance of everyone's differences and on the other state that they would rather their child was dead than slightly difficult.

I wouldn't mind if one of my deceased relatives dropped a gold nugget on my nightstand. I love gold nuggets.

Lynn x,
Dimmers are notorious for blowing as you observed yours do. Sometimes a surge of electricity will do it.

Did yours continue to function properly or did you have to have it replaced? - AOD

This explain much of the physical mediumship:

Amos, This all started three months after he passed and continued for another three months or so. There were other phenomena that occurred during that period of time that had hadn't occurred before or after. All of which led my wife and I to take a drive to sit with medium Georgia O'Connor who, without asking a single question of us (I wouldn't have given a straight answer to her if she had) no fishing and without error instantly produced a loud and clear communication channel to my deceased father. I scheduled the sitting using a fake name and with no personally identifying pre-registration information. My father's spirit named some of the activities we had witnessed in the house and explained that he had done these things to get my attention because he was concerned about something in my life and needed to get my attention.

Combined, these events make, for me, a compelling case and it all took my wife from non-believer to believer in short time, but it's just anecdote for anyone reading this. No more than campfire stories, really. I probably shouldn't have brought it up again.

Eric, No, this is a good anecdotal story. Fleshing out the detail helped me a lot. These kinds of things certainly are interesting to say the least. It is difficult to believe that there is not something meaningful behind it all. Like you, I think I would be compelled to believe that I had some communication from my relative. I think this is a little more than just a campfire story. The communication from your father through Georgia O'Connor was the clincher as he referenced some of the activities that had occurred at your house. - AOD

Also you may all be amused to know the old saw about God not healing amputees needs to be changed:
It just took a while to translate the instructions, as it were.
Deeply annoyed right now that a stupid person made that comment on a site I don't have an account on and so I can't tell them that. I hate when there's an obvious comeback and I can't use it.

Amos, OK. Good. So back to physical mediumship. ....IMO, for reasons described above, it should be real, but they all seem to be total fakes - or dishonest enough that if the phenomena aren't happening they fake it, thus discrediting any reality to the thing.

It's just a sorry state of affairs.

Eric Newhill: ||Combined, these events make, for me, a compelling case and it all took my wife from non-believer to believer in short time, but it's just anecdote for anyone reading this. ||

I accept that the physical phenomena and the Georgia O'Connor apparent communications happened as reported. Unfortunately the most economical interpretation is the usual one of telepathy with the living (namely yourself), rather than survival. That still leaves the physical phenomena, which would also have to be explained as living agent psi. If these experiences happened to me, rather than it being a compelling case of afterlife communication I would be forced to very seriously consider living agent psi.

It seems hard to dismiss the plausibility of super-psi rather than survival when considering many or most evidential cases in isolation just by themselves. Perhaps the key is to also consider the very rare types of cases that can't plausibly be explained by super-psi.

I just can't bring myself to accept physical phenomena as part of a séance. I might go so far to think that it may occur spontaneously (as in your example) unrelated to a medium but I don't think it occurs 'on demand'. May of the photographs of physical phenomena (not all) certainly appear hokey to me but even then I rationalize the hokey-ness by thinking they may have been staged for publication purposes, that is, they tried to create something that was reminiscent of what was seen during a séance to illustrate their story. Apports seem like worthless dime-store junk to me although I think there are a few reports of valuable rings and jewels being produced.

D.D. Hume apparently---reportedly---produced some amazing physical effects and some photos of floating tables and levitations of persons seem authentic so I am still open to considering that physical phenomena may occur. But I have to say that I don't think that the spiritual can be demonstrated by the physical. That is why I prefer the mental mediums over the physical mediums and that is why the case of Patience Worth is the one outstanding example of a mental medium that in my opinion is beyond explanation unless one accepts a spiritual source or reincarnation of Patience Worth (and other personalities) in Pearl Curran.

I am not yet convinced that ectoplasm is anything from the spirit world or generated internally out of some substance from the medium and although the telling of some examples seems to be somewhat convincing I just can't take that step to believe it's real. The bottom line for me is that I just don't trust what people say to be true. It may be what they want to be true or think they saw ( or what will sell books or bring notoriety ) but I just don't trust people to always be accurate in their reports or descriptions of these types of things. I am a 'Doubting Thomas' as I need to thrust my hand into the bleeding side before I will believe. (I know. "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.")

Reports of people seeing apparitions may be true and I myself suspect that I may have interacted with a non-physical being but that being appeared to be solid and as real to me as any other person I might have seen. It is just what was said and the circumstances of the meeting seemed other-worldly to me. I think I am just imagining it and to report that as anything other than meeting a flesh and blood person would be misleading. Unfortunately, some people might!

I remember when my cousin drowned and a few hours after I had heard the news I was sitting on the outside steps when a drop of water dripped onto my head. Well, you can imagine where my mind went but on reflection I realized I was sitting directly underneath the rain gutter which probably leaked onto my head.

I have to be very critical of reports of physical phenomena and I know when I question the details of these reports ( as I do on this blog) that people may get irritated with me. It is not my intent to demean any report. My interest is only to see if I can find any irrefutable evidence of life after death and I am very demanding. So far, only the Patience Worth case and a few modern mental mediums give me real cause for belief. - AOD

AOD, I think you make excellent points about "love." I think many of our relationships are just convenience, and some affection. As Neale Donald Walsh wrote, real love isn't something that can be destroyed in a few minutes (for instance, when learning of a partner's infidelity). There are very few people who love unconditionally. It's a word bandied about so often, it's almost meaningless.

Anyway, if there is an Afterlife, and I'm lucky enough to get to the good place, God help me that I don't end up with some of those people who "love" me. Shudder.

Who do you mean by 'they all' Eric? Do you mean all current or all ever investigated?

"But I have to say that I don't think that the spiritual can be demonstrated by the physical. That is why I prefer the mental mediums over the physical mediums and that is why the case of Patience Worth is the one outstanding example of a mental medium that in my opinion is beyond explanation unless one accepts a spiritual source or reincarnation of Patience Worth (and other personalities) in Pearl Curran."

You know that mental mediums are also physical
in a sense? Because mental mediums write or speak, which are physical actions, publicly observable. The difference between physical and mental mediums is that the former are merely physical and the latter in addition to physical are informational. So seek the spiritual through mental mediums is also to seek the spiritual through the physical.

Another idea is that although some paranormal physical phenomena are authentic, only some informational facts are relevant to the subject of an afterlife, because only if shown indicative of the identity of a deceased person we are with evidence of the existence of an afterlife.

nbtruthman - I understand the super-psi argument. It could be a fair explanation in some or all cases of both mental and physical phenomena.

However, I actually think that by making the super-psi argument one is demonstrating an overly literal - or overly concrete - interpretation of "reality". My answer to you is really the same answer I have for Amos.

Let's start here, because I think we can all agree on it - If you accept the evidence of the "paranormal" enough to advance the super-psi argument then you agree that consciousness is not produced by or limited to the physical brain and the five senses.

Anyone who concludes that the phenomena are created by living spirits of the deceased would also agree to the same.

So both camps agree that consciousness is primary. It is The Thing.

But what about all of this physical matter all around us? I am no physicist. I've never been comfortable with that science. But my understanding - in doubt highly correctable layman's terms - is that it is now accepted that physical matter is nothing more than particles held together by energy. At a certain level of granularity we may not even be talking about "particles" anymore in the normal sense and the line between physical and energy becomes blurred. Kind of like light photons.

At any rate, bottom line, IMO, is that the physical realm is merely a dense level of particle vibration that is willed together by some kind of consciousness.

So working on the distinction between a "living" agent and a "deceased" spirit has it all wrong. That perspective and any theories arising from it is based on an undue emphasis on dense vibrations of energy (spirits with bodies) versus less vibrations of energy (spirits without bodies).

It also seems to me that the ability to will energy into denser or less dense concentrations would be a means of consciousness creating apports.

Maybe someone with better understanding of physics can fill in the blanks - or tell me that I'm completely full of it :-)

I guess in order to stand the test of credibility and believability every medium must provide information that no one knows about or else any information given is considered to be obtained by telepathy with a living mind, psi or simple ‘mind-reading’ or information might be available in some esoteric or hidden book in some library in the world because if it is, then surely ‘super-psi’ would be able to find it or some person on the other side of the world who knew the information. Of course no one can validate that information was obtained by super-psi because none of us is omniscient enough to know everything in the world or elsewhere.

Eleanor Sidgwick even explained Leonora Piper’s contacts with ‘spirits’ as telepathy, but telepathy with the dead. (I never understood Sidgwick’s reasoning with this claim because whether or not it is telepathy with the dead or the dead are communicating directly or through a control, it is still communication with the spirit of a deceased person. Of course she may have been thinking of some continuing residue of a dead person that still contained the information and could be discerned by telepathy.)

I am not so sure that there is really good evidence that psi or super-psi actually exist. So I don’t know where we are going with trying to explain information obtained from mediums if one can always explain it by telepathy, psi or super-psi, all very debatable means of obtaining information. It’s like always explaining physical phenomena produced by a medium by claiming that the medium had an accomplice. Well, yes but what is a come-back to that claim or the super-psi claim especially after the passage of many years. The only reasonable response is 'Maybe so! Maybe not!' - AOD

I understand physical mediumship to be different than you do. For me, a physical medium produces things like ectoplasm, apports, materilizations, direct voice communication, translocations of people or things, lights, globes, electronic voice phenomena or pictures.etc. A mental medium does not produce anything physical. They may write something down or perhaps automatic writing may be employed by spirits or spirit controls but primarily a mental medium functions as a conduit between the physical world and a spiritual world conveying information only, nothing physical.

While I might tend to agree that consciousness is primary and that some consciousness, i.e., the subconscious or subliminal mind is not produced by the brain or limited by it, But I think that there is more to it than that. I have come to respect Rupert Sheldrake's theory of Morphic Fields and Morphic Resonance as contributing to the form and behaviors of physical things. Somehow there must be a design for physical things, a morphic field to use Sheldrakes' term.

Each physical object whether animate or inanimate has a more or less distinct border or limit to its shape. That's what makes it a 'physical ' thing. There are few or no physical things that have a fuzzyness to their form excepting gasses maybe. What is it that forces particles/energy to conform to a certain shape. Is it consciousness that dictates the shape? Is it the speed of vibrations that results in shapes? As vibrations speed up do shapes lose their borders and thereby loose their form as do gasses?

If you have an hour and a half or so to spare you might want to look at a youtube video of an animated conversation between Rupert Sheldrake and Bruce Lipton which I think is not only informational but entertaining. (Sheldrake does have a sense of humor.). Since I have become more knowledgeable of Sheldrake's more serious work I have come to respect him highly. The video is at


"A mental medium does not produce anything physical."

It is not true, because talking or writing are physical processes besides informational: there is no case there is only information without a physical correlate. I understand the difference you make between mediums, but is a difference between physical mediums, which invalidates the idea that we can not study the spiritual through the physical, because we have no choice but to do so.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)