I haven't posted much new material lately, in part because I've been busy, but also in part because I'm not quite sure what this blog should be about anymore. When I started blogging back in January of 2005, I unimaginatively titled my space Michael Prescott's Blog because I had no idea what subject matter I would end up discussing. I definitely didn't anticipate homing in on evidence for life after death and its implications. If anything, I probably figured I would talk mostly about fiction writing, movies, and current events, with the paranormal as only a small part of the mix.
But over the years, the reactions I got from readers were usually most positive when psi and afterlife issues were under discussion. As a result, in classic stimulus-and-response fashion, I gravitated toward this material. I've written in the last year or two that I'm not quite as interested in this subject as I used to be; I've read and written so much about it that, for me, it feels kind of played out. A few times in the past year, I've put up a post on politics just for variety, but in almost all cases I've gotten many negative responses.
What's been most apparent recently, however, is that even when I put up a nonpolitical post, the discussion can turn heatedly political in short order. This was most obvious with regard to my post "A World of Hurt," which concerned different theories of evil and their spiritual implications; the comments thread has spiraled down into a free-for-all about Donald Trump, Brexit, and other hot-button issues that have very little to do with the original topic.
My impression is that many readers, like me, are starting to get bored with rehashing paranormal and spiritual issues, and are looking for a different direction. This is fine by me. The problem is, I'm not quite sure what direction to take. I don't want to turn this blog into a political forum, because the arguments can become so contentious, and because there are already a huge number of political websites pushing every conceivable point of view. Besides, who wants to think about politics all the time?
I do, however, have other interests – for instance, the Shakespeare authorship question, classic and contemporary movies, fiction-writing techniques and practices, the history of Christianity as reconstructed by modern New Testament academic studies, special visual effects in cinema, and money management. I can probably think of other things, but that's a start.
I'm wondering if perhaps the blog should become more eclectic and deal with some or all of the above issues on a regular basis, along with the occasional paranormal post as necessary. Or would it be better to stick with paranormal stuff and simply have fewer posts? Or do you think it's time for me to shut down the blog, while leaving all the earlier posts and comments threads archived indefinitely?
I'm open to any suggestions and ideas. I'll be traveling tomorrow, so I may not be able to approve comments right away.
I really enjoy the blog. I have found more credible discussion here on the paranormal than anywhere else besides maybe a Signs of Reincarnation group (and it gets a little specialized in my opinion.) I'm very interested in Reincarnation simply because (for me)it's more promising than most of the other theories out there other than oblivion which isn't promising but is possible. :-o
I do agree that the general topic of the paranormal has been done to death. But, maybe as someone else said use some good research and talk about specific people such as Danileson or Leslie Flint. I also find that interesting. Although, I have a hard time believing any "just so stories" including atheistic ones. Also, you have had some interesting guest blogs here. Either way it's a pleasure to connect here and on facebook.
Posted by: Steve Snead | April 03, 2017 at 11:32 AM
One issue I have had with mediumship that is supposed to occur via an ectoplasmic voice box is that I have never heard a man be able to do a credible female voice. It always sounds like a man.
And they can't always do men well, either. E.g., David Thompson, whose voices are an outright travesty. But I think he's a total fraud anyway.
I listened to the recording of Flint as Chopin (or Chopin via Flint). I did not have any surface-level issues with the voice. It at least *sounded* like a pretty natural foreign accent to me (i.e., not like a native English speaker obviously failing to put on a foreign accent). It would be interesting to hear the opinion of a native Polish speaker on the matter. Even better would be a native Polish speaker familiar with Chopin, the languages he knew, and pertinent 19th century issues.
I do have some conceptual issues with the Flint recording. I don't consider any of these dealbreakers, so to speak, just things that strike me as potentially problematic:
• Does Chopin know English in the Afterlife? If so, is there a reason why he speaks with perfect grammar and excellent diction but still has an rather heavy accent?
• Or is it that he is really speaking Polish but it is somehow translated by Flint into English? If so, why does the accent remain? Why not just capture the essence of his voice as it would be if he were a native English speaker? Also, if Flint is translating, then how is this in any sense "direct voice"?
To me, really the most plausible thing is if Flint was doing mediumship in his own voice but simply capturing Chopin's spirit (in both senses). It may even sound like Chopin's actual voice, i.e., if were speaking perfect English but also in an accent.
Posted by: Matt Rouge | April 03, 2017 at 04:48 PM
I tend not to comment much here, but I think that, like many others, I've become emotionally attached to this blog and it's readers. I like reading about their point of views and I think your writing is of excellent quality, Michael. I visit this blog twice a week to see if there are new entries.
Still, I think it would be selfish if I asked you to continue to write about topics that may no longer interest you as much as they did.
But, I like knowing that the archives will still be here, I have your older entries to read (I discovered this blog in 2014). And you can still keep writing about any topic you consider worth writing about if you want, be it Shakespeare or any new insight on the Paranormal. I've alwas found Guest Posts interesting too!
Thank you for such a great blog, it has given me comfort in my darkest hours that maybe I will be reunited with the loved ones that I've lost. Thank you.
Posted by: Luciano | April 03, 2017 at 09:03 PM
"I do have some conceptual issues with the Flint recording." - Matt
Yes, me too. Anyway, below, are my latest finding. The first is Harry Price as recorded in a Leslie Flint sitting and the second is a real life recording. I find both interesting (although, for some reason, I find the real life more amusing). I like the way Price speaks of buildings having atmospheres, just as people do. My home is very old. And the thing I've always liked the most about it is the feeling that all who have lived here through the centuries have been happy. It's another Flint recording that speaks to me of things that I've thought about so often but never really spoken of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vhSJH9Dz2E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdue2DqxFkw
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 04, 2017 at 04:33 AM
Curiouser and curiouser Michael.
http://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/notebook-written-by-unknown-17th-century-william-shakespeare-scholar-comes-to-light-leaving-antiques-roadshow-expert-trembling/ar-BBzffg8?li=AAaUOAg&ocid=spartanntp
Hope the link works Lyn x.
Posted by: Lynn | April 04, 2017 at 07:58 AM
@Michael, have you also changed your position regarding 'survival' as part of your waning interest in the paranormal? In general I have noticed the number of bloggers in the paranormal have been greatly reduced the last couple of years. Perhaps it's because not much new material in these matters have surfaced the last couple of years.
Posted by: sbu | April 04, 2017 at 08:11 AM
Since you ask for opinions, I'll say that I think the blog has run its course and should close. Pastures new, and all that!
Posted by: Callisto | April 04, 2017 at 08:36 AM
"One issue I have had with mediumship that is supposed to occur via an ectoplasmic voice box is that I have never heard a man be able to do a credible female voice. It always sounds like a man." - Matt
---
But I don't see a problem with that. The way I see it, the 'ectoplasmic voicebox' is an ethereal recreation of Flint's voicebox that the spirit uses to communicate. There's a fusion there, but generally it's the medium's vocal characteristics which are being utilised and 'stretched' to match the spirit's, with variable results.
It's not simply a case of recreating 100% a spirit's vocal chords - it's a fusion of the spirit and the medium, but the medium provides most of the energy to make it happen.
You can of course choose not to believe this, but then, you need to provide good evidence to support a contention of fraud, and the means by which he was able to access such highly verifiable information, and I have seen no evidence to support deception on the scale that would be required.
Posted by: Douglas | April 04, 2017 at 09:14 AM
PS regarding Zerdini, I'm sorry to hear he has passed away.
He was a great character, although his 'Gandalf attitude' ('I don't suffer fools gladly!') meant that things sometimes got a bit, er, heated when disagreements arose.
Zerdini saw no issue with the quality, or lack of, in the Flint voices; for him, it was the quality of the information that mattered.
Zerdini's biggest beef with David Thompson was not the voices, it was the fact that Thompson has a pretty poor track record of providing solid verifiable information for sitters, and that's what counts.
Posted by: Douglas | April 04, 2017 at 09:21 AM
Ps. We've also had quite a lot of psychic activity around this old house too: mostly spirit lights and orbs - all seen with the naked eye. And on one occasion, shortly after the death of a family friend, Harry Seddon, a freezing cold blast of air travelled right through, seemingly from one end to the other. It passed me as I came down the stairs and was quite unmistakable: absolutely icy cold and *much* stronger than any draft I've ever felt. It was as if someone had left outside doors open at each end of the house on a day when there was an arctic blizzard raging outside.
In reality, the weather was sunny and calm (end of April) and I could find no doors open. Indeed the only windows open were in two of the bathrooms, each only slightly so and none causing any kind of noticeable draft.
My husband, who has no interest in matters psychic, told me that he'd had exactly the same experience an hour or two earlier and gone through the same checks as me. We just stared at each other, utterly dumbfounded. What else can one do?
A few weeks later, my friend, Linda, and I were sitting in the garden, at a table where Harry had often shared afternoon teas with us, when a butterfly landed nearby. Almost immediately, that butterfly began to flutter between us, from one to the other, landing on our arms each time. This wasn't just a fleeting thing. It went on for some ten minutes or so until Linda began to wonder it might be Harry coming to say hello. And since the butterfly's wings were a little raggedy around the edges, it reminded us of the fact that Herry was quite elderly (86 years old) when he died. As soon as we decided on that as an explanation the butterfly flew away.
There are so many such incidences that I would be here all day if I tried to recount them all. And as always with such anomalies, who can tell us what, if anything, they represent and why they occur? We can only decide such matters for ourselves and trust our intuition. After all, isn't that what it's there for? :)
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 04, 2017 at 09:43 AM
Douglas,
There is much more needed to produce audible understandable speech than vocal chords. Obviously, lips, teeth, tongue, brain, nerves, muscles, head bones and nasal cavities and lungs are necessary to produce understandable human speech. The 'voice box' of Leslie Flint was never described other than an "ectoplasmic voice box". When we think of "voice box" most of us will be inclined to imagine a human voice box, that is the vocal cords of the larynx but it could be that an ectoplasmic voice box is nothing like a human voice box and I find it interesting that light would cause severe harm to the medium who was extruding ectoplasm to produce a 'voice box' but there is at least one picture of Leslie Flint ( apparently requiring light to expose the film) with the ectoplasmic voice box to the side, under his chin. It was also stated that ectoplasm was also provided by the sitters in the circle with Flint so according to the explanation of the effect of light on ectoplasm, not only Flint but his sitters would be harmed if light was turned on. (Quite a good reason not to turn on the light) As I understand it all of the Flint séances were conducted in the dark and that voices were thought to be heard emanating from various parts of the room If that is the case, either the 'voice box' under Flint's chin was not needed or it floated or was carried around the room in the dark.
I think it is assumed that the 'voice box' was like a human voice box, but I am not aware that any detailed description of Flint's ectoplasmic 'voice box' was ever provided. Flint's 'voice box' may have been something entirely different than a human voice box; something created by the spirits to allow communication between the physical plane and the spiritual plane; something like a spiritual telephone.
As far as verifiable information is concerned and acknowledging that I have not listened to the entire collection of Flint recordings what I hear is mostly pontificating, reflection and reminiscing and the stating of commonly known information or information that Flint or others probably had an opportunity to easily find out.
Is there a séance where Flint communicated with a spirit that no one in the circle knew and upon subsequent investigation was identified and information provided by that spirit was verified? If there is one or two then that would add credibility to Flint's voices.
As I have discussed with Julie on another blog, I think that Flint was just a diversion, a distraction and that Betty Greene and George Woods who attended the séances were really the source of the male and female voices in the dark. The fact that Flint was bound and gagged during the séances is distraction and irrelevant if Greene and Woods were the source of the voices.- AOD
Posted by: Amos Oliver Doyle | April 04, 2017 at 03:57 PM
I for one will never tire of the paranormal or NDEs. Both never cease to fascinate me, and I do feel that in many instances (not all of course), we're given amazing glimpses of something so far better than this world.
As with many others, I do appreciate this blog, which I happened to come across at a time when your writings about NDEs helped me a lot, as I suppose others have experienced a great deal. After reading various NDE books and this blog and comments, I'm about 95 percent sure it's all for real.
Posted by: Kathleen | April 04, 2017 at 06:37 PM
Hi Michael,
I understand your feelings about coming to a dead end (ha, a bit of a pun) regarding life after death research, but my impression is that you've covered that topic primarily and not much dealt with psi and paranormal matters in a broader sense.
I used to like reading Dean Radin's blog, but he's wound that up.
I find it hard to find a good replacement, and I would like it if you developed a blogging interest in that field.
But generally, I think most readers find you a good natured blogger, and would probably follow you regardless of what topic/s you tended to follow. (Well, OK, maybe not so much the Shakespeare identity issue - that seems a bit of a dead end too!)
I think it sad that broad based blogging is in serious decline at the hands of the instant sugar hit of twitter, so I would encourage you to continue blogging, no matter what topic.
Posted by: Steve from Brisbane | April 04, 2017 at 09:31 PM
Douglas wrote,
||The way I see it, the 'ectoplasmic voicebox' is an ethereal recreation of Flint's voicebox that the spirit uses to communicate. There's a fusion there, but generally it's the medium's vocal characteristics which are being utilised and 'stretched' to match the spirit's, with variable results.||
That seems a bit redundant then, inasmuch as, in all cases that I have heard, the supposed ectoplasmic voice box sounds like the medium imitating a voice. IOW, it could just as easily be the medium's own voice box. That doesn't mean I think there is nothing paranormal going on: if there is ectoplasm seen coming out of the medium, then that's a paranormal phenomenon in its own right. It's just that I have yet to be impressed with direct voice *qua* voice. I am a (highly limited) medium myself and am convinced that at least mental mediumship is real.
||You can of course choose not to believe this, but then, you need to provide good evidence to support a contention of fraud, and the means by which he was able to access such highly verifiable information, and I have seen no evidence to support deception on the scale that would be required.||
People can be incorrect without the intention to lie or defraud. The medium him/herself might not know how things work, especially if they are working in a trance state. I think it's fair to be micro-skeptical (in the true sense). Even if ectoplasm is coming out of their body and they *think* they are doing direct voice, who knows, maybe they are mistaken on that one point. I think the phenomenon requires a lot more study, preferably with infrared cameras running.
Also, fraud can be combined with real phenomena. It's clear that this was the case with a lot of mediums, and sometimes the cheating was apparently unconscious. Even re Thompson, I have read about trumpets flying around the seance room with such speed as to defy any "normal" explanation. There may well be genuine psychic phenomena mixed in with less savory things.
Posted by: Matt Rouge | April 04, 2017 at 09:57 PM
Something of interest. It doesn't exactly prove life after death, but that regardless of religious ideology, they all had the same experience.
https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/german-scientists-prove-there-is-life-after-death/
Cheers Lyn.
Posted by: Lynn | April 05, 2017 at 08:28 AM
Unfortunately, World News Daily is one of those fake news sites that make up stories (or recycle stories made up elsewhere).
Posted by: Michael Prescott | April 05, 2017 at 09:00 AM
Its often hard when things are posted about authenticity.
Here it is again on this site.
http://medihealthsci.com/scientists-from-germany-proved-that-there-is-life-after-death/
Sounds like the experiment possibly has taken place. Lyn x.
Posted by: Lynn | April 05, 2017 at 09:26 AM
Yes, I liked the World Daily News story of the 200 million year old dinosaur egg that hatched in a Berlin museum and that the baby dinosaur is now in a zoo. - AOD
Posted by: Amos Oliver Doyle | April 05, 2017 at 10:57 AM
Michael, I've been thinking about your question. Maybe the issue is one of expectations.
Does hosting a blog require posting with any specific frequency? Why not just write when you feel inspired?
After all, subscribers get an email whenever you contribute something new, and even if that were only every three months, I for one would still come here to visit, and maybe to comment. And I'll bet other readers feel the same.
I ask this partly because I'm mulling over these possibilites for myself. I'll be publishing a book shortly, and I plan to host a blog to talk about it (and other things). But I'm a bit nervous, because I'm a slow writer, and I want to do this in a way that brings me joy.
So the question is, regardless of how often we do it, if you (and I) have something extraordinary to say and offer it for free, won't people find their way to it?
Of course, it's a simpler matter for you—you have an established audience!
Robert McLuhan, by the way, has sometimes gone months without posting, and Paranormalia is thriving.
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | April 05, 2017 at 03:24 PM
Interesting thoughts, Bruce. That might be the best solution of all.
"After all, subscribers get an email whenever you contribute something new." They do? Shows how much I know. I was totally unaware of that. I didn't even know there were subscribers!
"Yes, I liked the World Daily News story of the 200 million year old dinosaur egg that hatched in a Berlin museum and that the baby dinosaur is now in a zoo." No, that one's true.
🙃
Posted by: Michael Prescott | April 05, 2017 at 03:55 PM
Not to beat a clinically dead horse, but the German scientist story is definitely fictional. It's been circulating since at least 2014, and has been thoroughly debunked. Not to mention that a legitimate story of this importance would be front page news everywhere.
http://wafflesatnoon.com/scientists-prove-life-after-death/
Incidentally, there's a Netflix movie called The Discovery that dramatizes the social and personal consequences when life after death is proven and the news is made public. It stars Robert Redford and Rooney Mara. Reviews have been mixed. By coincidence, I had an idea for a novel with the same premise about ten years ago, but my agent showed zero interest. *sigh*
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5155780/
Posted by: Michael Prescott | April 05, 2017 at 04:07 PM
"The Discovery" is a recently featured movie on Netflix.
Posted by: Amos Oliver Doyle | April 05, 2017 at 05:49 PM
Sorry Michael, I am not paying attention - AOD
Posted by: Amos Oliver Doyle | April 05, 2017 at 07:43 PM
A more inclusive view of things would seem to be how Rupert Sheldrake deals with the paranormal, in his Science Set Free podcasts he and his companion go all over the place with a general framing of good will and openness.
I'm really more interested in convincing people that we've got not only a capacity but a moral obligation to work for equal justice, economic justice, the general welfare and the biosphere. I don't think any of it is really unrelated though if you're going to concentrate on the purely statistical and experimental that gets lost in the details and the brawls with materialists.
Posted by: Anthony McCarthy | April 05, 2017 at 09:07 PM
I just watched "The Discovery" and found it to be very slow paced. I had trouble understanding some of the dialogue as the background music seemed to drown out some of the speech and the actors tended to mumble sometimes. It was somewhat a morose movie I thought and the writing didn't hang together very well and the actors were all Hollywood types. It was distracting to watch the old wizened Robert Redford with his shock of dyed hair. He is starting to shrivel-up quite a bit. The ending was frizzled and hard to follow. I wouldn't recommend it but it may be that some people coming from a different perspective may find it at least interesting. - AOD
Posted by: Amos Oliver Doyle | April 05, 2017 at 10:58 PM
But the lack of new studies about psychic / afterlife can lead to stagnation. A stagnation because these phenomena do not really exist? I do not think so but it's worth exploring this topic.
Posted by: Juan | April 06, 2017 at 04:12 AM
There's a simple reason for the paucity of new studies. Hardly anybody is studying these topics, because there is almost no funding available (and because focusing on the paranormal is a career-killing move in most cases). I would wager that more money is spent on research into male pattern baldness in one day than is spent on parapsychology research in a year.
On the other hand, the military is starting to take an interest in the "spidey sense," which seems awfully close to ESP:
http://time.com/4721715/phenomena-annie-jacobsen/
Posted by: Michael Prescott | April 06, 2017 at 10:55 AM
Hey,I want to know how to get an email when there is a new post! Whatever the topic, Michael, I will be reading. This is one of my places.
Posted by: Susan | April 06, 2017 at 11:45 AM
Just write infrequently on psi and afterlife issues -- maybe once every 3 months or so. And write about other stuff on the odd occasion. But don't allow writing these blog entries to become a chore. Just write when you feel fired up about something (although perhaps not too much politics).
More guest blogs would be an excellent idea. I don't mind contributing, but I normally write about philosophical stuff on my own blog and I fear it wouldn't generate much debate.
Posted by: Ian Wardell | April 06, 2017 at 06:37 PM
I very much agree with what Bruce says, hehe.
Writing whenever you feel inspired could keep the blog & discussion alive without feeling like you have to meet a quota.
Also I didn't know I could subscribe... how do I do that?
Posted by: Luciano | April 07, 2017 at 12:11 AM
I've been ghosting this blog for many years. The other two I frequent the most are Victor Zammit and Michael Tymn. Yes, the sense of "rehash" is something I feel frequently. At some point, another story about, say, materialization is worthless unless I take the next big step and participate in one. But I keep coming back to your blog because every now and then a new angle or study is revealed that has radical implications for me. The best example is the Psilocybin study where the subjects had the most intense spiritual experience of their lives, yet the only thing that showed up on the brain scans was a slight depression in those areas of the brain that calm down in a meditation. That was groundbreaking for me, as the original reason that I began to doubt my parent's belief in life after death was the spiritual experiences that friends reported from drugs in the late sixties as I was coming of age. Though I never doubted ESP, I figured if a chemical drug has that effect, then we must just be just chemical brains doing ESP. Your tip-off about this study was a major turning point for me in returning to my roots, and peace of mind. Do what you must, but thank you for what you've done!
Posted by: Lloyd | April 07, 2017 at 02:25 AM
Four suggestions off the top of my head:
I suggest "going into reruns." IOW, if technically allowable somehow (maybe via workarounds):
Start re-posting threads starting from #1, in 2005, one every second or third day (or fourth or fifth, depending on how much commentary is provoked).
Allow new comments on them, beneath a triple line of asterisks and a boilerplate explanatory note that you insert.
Allow readers to upvote threads they especially like.
At the end of re-posting every 20 (say) threads, flag the top 6 vote-getters (i.e., 6) as "Favorites," so that future visitors can use the sidebar as a navigation aid to skim the cream on this site.
As for the problem of vociferous thread-derailment into topics like partisan politics, you've handled that well on the global warming topic, by banning it. For other off-topic, inflammatory matters, why not appoint a volunteer hatchet man to replace such remarks with "[snip—off-topic]" entries? It would be a bit tricky to do because by allowing politically tinged remarks that are not explicitly partisan, which is unavoidable to some degree, some readers will still be a bit disgruntled, with some reason. But at least the problem will be 10% the size of the current one. Possibly a lurker would be best-suited for the task of moderator.
How about posting a permanent link on this site to your other sites, including your political one?
Maybe add a "blogroll" in the sidebar to other paranormal sites you like—indeed, to all the other sites you read/like?
Posted by: Roger Knights | April 07, 2017 at 10:11 AM
To get email notifications of new threads, just click on the penultimate line in the sidebar, which reads, "Subscribe to this blog's feed."
Posted by: Roger Knights | April 07, 2017 at 11:46 AM
I have to admit I like Roger Knights' idea of just cutting out political off-topic posts.
Political blogs are a dime-a-dozen, paranormal blogs of this quality are not.
Posted by: SPatel | April 07, 2017 at 01:16 PM
Thanks, SPatel, but my suggestion was more modest—I should have been clearer. I suggested cutting out only political "remarks," which typically (at the start of a derailment) are only a sentence or a paragraph. If these can be nipped quickly enough, the deletion of follow-on, entirely political posts can be avoided.
Posted by: Roger Knights | April 07, 2017 at 04:46 PM
PS: The moderator should also be allowed to insert warning remarks like "You're on thin ice here." That's to avoid over-reaction in borderline cases.
Posted by: Roger Knights | April 07, 2017 at 04:54 PM
PPS: The line saying "click here to subscribe to the blog feed" should be moved, or copied, to the top of the sidebar, if possible, where it would be noticed by more readers.
Posted by: Roger Knights | April 07, 2017 at 05:13 PM
I might be in the minority, but I don't think the political discussions on here are a huge problem. There is a regular group of commenters here. It's like a clubhouse. People are well behaved *enough* IMHO. Sometimes we end up debating the paranormal, and sometimes it veers into politics, and sometimes it even gets a bit heated. But such is life. Part of my spiritual belief system is that there is a base level of trouble in any aspect of life, and trying to eliminate that trouble can cause different or greater trouble to arrive. Put another way, a little bit of trouble can inoculate one against bigger trouble. That's why I don't recommend trying to make blog commenting more perfect or on-topic. I think this is about as good as it gets, really. IMHO. :)
Posted by: Matt Rouge | April 08, 2017 at 03:17 AM
"Put another way, a little bit of trouble can inoculate one against bigger trouble. That's why I don't recommend trying to make blog commenting more perfect or on-topic."
Well said, Matt! As long as people are speaking from the heart (as distinguished from playing mind games) I don't really mind how heated things get. It's a great compliment for people to respond with exactly what they truly feel. It's also very healthy.
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 08, 2017 at 10:33 AM
Regarding political post and/or comments;
I think they are a net negative, though appreciate what Matt says about there always being some level of "trouble" in any group activity.
I regret my participation in such discussions here and contributions to the ambient trouble.
OTOH, it *is* interesting to see what people that we know here think about political situations. We discuss the paranormal and our position(s) on that topic has implications for our spiritual outlook, which in turn has implications for our politics.
It's almost like politics are the silent elephant in the room when we are ruminating metaphysical theories because politics is where the rubber meets the road. So we develop all of these metaphysical models and theories of what it's all about. So what? At some point it all has to direct how we live our lives as individuals and as communities; or it's all just a hobby to pass the time. Which is ok too, of course, but I know some of us take it more seriously.
And I have noted that amongst the contributors here there is a certain train of thought that is consistent, running from what paranormal evidence one accepts and emphasizes all the way through to what politics one adheres to. I imagine there is a self reinforcing feedback loop from the politics one adheres to back to one's spiritual beliefs. IMO, it's all connected. We are who are. Few are unbiased enough to go outside themselves and be 100% objective.
When we fight over politics we are really fighting over who's reality is real, which is pretty silly, because, IMO, we all live in separate realities, I digress.....
Posted by: Eric Newhill | April 08, 2017 at 12:06 PM
So Eric starts it all off again with his 'party political' mindset that he attaches to everyone else.
Some people simply aren't party political. Some people simply trust their gut with regard to individuals. Some people are neither 'left' nor 'right'. Some people simply don't trust narcissistic sociopaths. Simples! :)
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 08, 2017 at 01:12 PM
@ Eric Newhill: Ah, I can see the usefulness of questions about Evil, Free Will, etc and how they connect to our views of the paranormal/spiritual/metaphysical. I guess I consider these "meta political" questions, which I actually find interesting.
Curious what you mean about separate realities, I myself have wondered if there are really universes for each person that overlap.
Posted by: SPatel | April 08, 2017 at 01:16 PM
@ Roger : Ah, apologies for misrepresenting you. I guess I'd go one step beyond and just insist people discuss things on the level of metaphysical ideas that precede one's modern day outlook into politics...which I admittedly find boring...
Posted by: SPatel | April 08, 2017 at 01:18 PM
Thanks Roger!
Posted by: Luciano | April 08, 2017 at 08:09 PM
Hi Michael,
Over the years I have been following your blog with great interest and I might say that I have contributed a lot to it myself - just think of the denture man case, and the quarrels we had with the indomitable Dr Gerald Woerlee.
As a matter of fact these exchanges have contributed hugely to the content of the book The Self Does Not Die (written by Titus Rivas and myself). Therefore I wish to extend my wholehearted thanks to you that I and at times, also Titus could post our thoughts and findings on this blog.
Truly, it would be great loss if indeed you decide to stop this. It was and is one of the best blogs ever, also because of you excellent moderation. I cannot remember that (pseudo-) skeptics got in that easily, neither were we bothered by nasty trolls.
So please keep this blog accesible at all times, and perhaps so now and then a guest-blogger can start a topic that will be of interest to everyone.
BTW - re Leslie Flint, I have listened to almost all of his recordings, and some are truly astonishing. I may relate some of this at a later date.
Warmest regards to you and all of you.
Smithy
Posted by: Smithy | April 09, 2017 at 05:35 AM
@SPatel,
Re; separate realities. I guess I am somewhat the antithesis of Art. Rather than coming here to experience "separation", I think we come here because it is a realm in which the physical nature of it forces interaction with all kinds of different mentalities from which, in the astral realms, we would be separated by mental/spiritual "vibrational" levels. In the astral realms thoughts are realities. Therefore, those with persistent types of thoughts are in different environments from those with other types of thoughts. Here, we are all stuck together due to our consensus on the laws of physicality. That's why life on earth is so messy and so full of strife.
Hope that helps clarify.
Posted by: Eric Newhill | April 09, 2017 at 10:27 AM
"BTW - re Leslie Flint, I have listened to almost all of his recordings, and some are truly astonishing. I may relate some of this at a later date." - Smithy
I hope you do. I've been on all sides of the Leslie Flint debate and finally settled in the same place as you. It's a most intriguing subject.
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 09, 2017 at 02:58 PM
Julie,
I watched the two videos (all of both of them) you posted above: Hines via Flint and Hines in life.
I thought Hines via Flint to be a surprisingly modern summary of how ghosts "work." Really, this is how ghosts are perceived today. I don't know which is true:
• What Hines via Flint said was original for its time, and that influenced the modern view.
• What Hines via Flint said was original for its time, but the modern view developed separately.
• What Hines said was not original for its time, and the modern view is simply a continuation of the view of the time of the recording (50s? 60s?).
I thought the voice in the Flint/Hines video sounded fundamentally the same as the voice in the Flint/Chopin video (obviously it was the same person talking) but without the Chopin accent. BUT, I think the voice in the Flint/Hines video *does* reflect Hines's intonation and vocabulary.
That said, I can sympathize also with AOD's statement, "... what I hear is mostly pontificating, reflection and reminiscing and the stating of commonly known information or information that Flint or others probably had an opportunity to easily find out."
It would take some solid (and probably somewhat difficult) research to find out if the ideas about ghosts were original at the time of the video. If they were not, I think it's not a stretch to call the video content "pontificating."
Posted by: Matt Rouge | April 09, 2017 at 07:07 PM
I think there was a lot of pontificating in those sittings. But then there's an awful lot of pontificating on 'this side' too. Human beings are that way inclined. And pontification has always been rife in the spiritualist movement.
As I said earlier, I've been on every side of the Flint debate. Over the past few weeks I've listened to a good many of those tapes and am getting to feel much more positive about this material. Even Mickey has grown on me! But while I'm not here to convince anyone, I would very much like to hear from those who have made a serious study of the Flint phenomenon.
Can anyone here recommend an intelligent discussion group on the subject? :)
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 09, 2017 at 09:03 PM
The thought just occurred to me that if Prince Charles were to pass over and return to talk to us via such a medium as Flint, we'd never for one moment believe it was him unless he delivered his usual line in pontification. :)
Posted by: Julie Baxter | April 09, 2017 at 09:16 PM