Saturday, October 16, 2010

Telepathy, Super-Psi, or Talking to the Dead?

It’s a question that has confounded researchers studying mediums since the late 1880’s. During the hey-day of spiritualism and the Society of Psychical Research, the cross-correspondence phenomenon of the early 1900’s convinced many of the SPR scientists the validity of human survival after death. The cross-correspondences consisted of at least three mediums (to as many as five), living many miles apart – in some cases, separated by the Atlantic Ocean – receiving a string of messages purported to come from a deceased personality that, when placed together, created a single meaning (for more info and examples too large to post here, check out In one case, an SPR scientist requested of the spirit to sign a future correspondence with a second medium in a particular way: using a drawn symbol. What was unique about this request was that he asked it in Latin, a language the medium didn’t know. And, as requested, another of the SPR mediums thousands of miles away did draw the requested symbol at the end of one of her sittings.

Now, most of these early mediums were automatic writers, where today’s mediums are considered “mental mediums”; that is, they receive information through the mind and bodily senses and then report it to the sitters. Automatic writers usually pay no attention to what’s going on in their heads and simply let the pen do the talking. Regardless of the style, whether written or mental, detailed and accurate information comes through, and usually quite specific in nature. For instance, when the name or initial of a person is mentioned in a sitting, as in this case from my last 1-on-1:

“Who is the ‘R’ name or sound connected with your father?”

“He had two sons, Robert and Raymond.”

“I also see an ‘A’, so let’s start with Raymond … He’s mentioning a creek, about going down to the creek.”

In this case, my client revealed when she was younger, she was trying to traverse a creek, fell in, and nearly drowned had her brother, Ray, not pulled her out.

Now, this kind of communication coupled with the cross correspondence communication is clearly suggestive of something anomalous happening. The big question with the scientists has been: Is it really talking to the dead?

Some other theories to counter the idea of post-mortem message exchanges are quite plausible: If we can accept the notion of telepathy – which many parapsychologists believe is nearly irrefutable – then what we have here is that the medium plucked out of the sitter’s head both the name and the incident most closely related to the individual. Another explanation is clairvoyance through the quantum holographic model. In this scenario, scientists believe every action and information is recorded at a quantum level and it is simply the medium accessing this information and not necessarily a deceased personality. Another explanation – and one that has been used as an alternative explanation to the cross correspondences – is super-psi, an extension of the original telepathy notion. Here, we have the idea that a medium is really just picking up on the thoughts and ideas of several people at once instead of from the dead. In the cross-correspondence cases, it was thought that the mediums were simply picking up on the thoughts and ideas from the other mediums involved in the experiments – a truly astounding feat if that were the case!

Now, aside from the fact that most mainstream scientists wholly dispute regular ESP and telepathy between a single individual to another, to assign the super-psi answer – though it sounds logical and plausible – is even more incredible. Let’s face it, if we deny regular telepathy, then how could we ever accept a “super” version of it? But then again, that’s if you deny telepathic abilities, which in my case, I don’t. But then, how do you answer the cross correspondence or other mediumistic messages? If scientists deny telepathy on a basic level, then they must also, by default, deny it on a super-psi level. However, if that is the case, that still leaves the question of where the information is coming from. If scientists cannot accept the answer of “the dead,” nor can they accept ESP, then what else is there?

Whatever the truth is, it does point to an amazing potential within the human condition to access information. (On a personal note, I find it humorous that before these other alternative explanations came about, such as the quantum holographic model, if scientists didn’t believe it was the dead, then they considered it telepathy; yet if other scientists didn’t believe in telepathy, then why couldn’t they believe it came from the dead? To me, it’s like – you can’t deny both – you have to admit something, and these are your options. I suppose saying “I do not know” is okay, in order to save face).

Now, what I find really interesting about all this research is – no one has ever asked what the medium thinks or feels. Why do they feel it’s from the dead? Perhaps in some cases, the mediums do not know; it is an assumption. Perhaps it is some kind of scientific protocol not to get the medium’s opinion or perception, that it might somehow taint the evidence or screw with the hypothesis. In either case, there is a missing element in the work that I believe should be included – What does the medium think and why.

My answer to why I think the information is from the deceased: The anomaly of where the spirit is felt standing in the room at the time of communication. To my knowledge, it has never been considered. I find it interesting that science is on the quest of trying to figure out where the information is coming from, but has yet to investigate that sense of occupied physical space. Nowhere in the literature have I read that anyone has mentioned feeling the presence in the room and that the information is flowing from that location. “It’s the sitter’s mind; it’s the holographic model; it’s multiple people’s minds …” Am I the only one who feels the presence in the room and where he/she is standing? I highly doubt it. And to me, that plays a huge part in the experience of conducting a successful sitting. Plus, I think there are many scientific ways of trying to validate that presence, using meters and other devices that might be sensitive to picking up minute environmental changes. We have several success stories in ghost research using detectors and such, and that could be a good place to start.

To me, this feeling of an occupying presence is a defining characteristic to many of the sittings I do. I can feel the personality standing (or in some cases hovering) within a specific area of the environment. I have relatives who appear on different sides of the sitter’s body – I can feel and oftentimes see energy in those places. I have received information from a sitter’s deceased friends (non-blood relatives) who approach from behind me. And sometimes they move – they don’t always remain stationary. These are definite cognitive impressions that suggest to me I am not in my sitter’s mind and could potentially be validated using sensitive technical gear.

Right now, since I can sense and feel a presence, I have to honestly “scratch” the telepathy hypothesis.

Additionally, in cases where I have two or more sitters, again, I feel a presence in the room distinct from either of my clients, and in several cases, some of the information that comes through wasn’t in any of the people’s thoughts at the time I mentioned it. To me, that says “scratch” to super-psi (if my clients weren’t thinking it, then how did I get it?).

There have been many studies over the course of nearly 80 years where people have tried to send information through the means of ESP to a percipient. These tests show that it takes a lot of repetition and concentration to get good statistical results. Most clients in a mediumistic setting, I’ll guess, probably have little to no experience in working with psychic phenomenon and being a sender of ESP paraphernalia, so I would have a hard time believing they were somehow responsible for the information that is relayed, much less the notion that perhaps they would also be supplying the feeling of an additional presence and its location in the room.

Finally, in this short laundry list of alternative explanations lands the quantum holographic recording model. Could I just be accessing the quantum archival network and not talking to dead people? Could the presence I am feeling simply be a recording of that person from the hologram?

Yes, that is acceptable … until the content of the messages come through.

In several cases, the deceased will acknowledge events and happenings that have occurred to the sitter since the deceased had been dead – someone got married, a new child was born into the family, what have you. Quantum holographic recording isn’t adequate enough to explain why the person I feel standing off to my left would be bringing up such information. Moreover, sometimes a deceased person will predict a future event. For instance, I mentioned to a client to watch out for a pair of birds, that’s how her deceased loved one would present himself. Not long after, she received a mysterious photograph of two birds on her cell phone. When she asked the caller why he sent it, he responded “I don’t know … I just felt I needed to.”

To me, though I may be seeing a precognitive event, that it was given to me from the standpoint of where I felt somebody occupying space and in a type of “voice,” I cannot ascribe it coming from the quantum holographic model. Let’s face it – there is meaning behind the action; a purpose for the prediction: a way for the deceased to notify the sitter “I’m all right and will give you the message.” That goes deeper than simply plucking something from a holographic recording, whether that recording has ties into the future or not.

Right now, parapsychologists studying mediums still have yet to say “They’re talking with the dead,” instead they have coined the term AIRS (Anomalous Information Retrieval System).

Yes, for scientists, the information is anomalous because there really is no definitive physical proof or modus operandi that fits within our standard physical model for how the information is received (and since we’re dealing with something essentially non-physical, how weird is it we are not finding physical evidence or clues, right?). The truth is, we may never achieve the level of proof physical scientists are looking for, simply because of the very nature of the phenomenon itself lies beyond the standard “markers” of the physical universe we live in.

But speaking as a medium – when I can see an energy presence and feel its distinctiveness and receive the kinds of information that comes from the direction of where I am sensing it – another possibility is revealed regarding the nature of this situation: I may be (statistically speaking) communicating not through telepathy with the living or some quantum recording field, but to a real person – the dead.

Until next time …

No comments:

Post a Comment