Sunday, February 12, 2017

A general note regarding after-death communications

I regularly read a number of books that purport to describe communications from the "dead" to the living. The bulk of these books are written by mediums and others who claim a special communication channel with the "other side."  It is impossible to know if these communications are valid. Some probably are, but I suspect that most are not. And it's impossible to know who is legit, and who isn't, based on a simple reading. I usually "crowdsource" this judgement task by reading the reviews of readers on Amazon.com. If a sharp reader or two is able to deflate a book with some well-chosen objections, then I don't bother it.

What I do, instead, is focus on individual accounts of communication from normal experiencers. Back in the old days, Fate magazine published many impressive "survival" communication accounts in their "My Proof Of Survival" column. Today, the best (and as far as I know, the only) source for these accounts is Dr. Jeff Long's ADCR.org site, where readers can anonymously upload their experiences. Taken collectively, these accounts suggest several broad themes:

Communication with survival personalities is strictly controlled by some force, order, rule, or government. Those who have "passed over" can communicate with the living only if it's allowed. There seems to be a hierarchy of sorts that processes and facilitates these requests;

Earth-bound personalities can annoy the living, but can't communicate with them;

The living can always communicate with those passed over, but the the specific recipient may not be able to, or allowed to, respond;

Those who have passed over may be at different "levels" during any given communication attempt and sometimes may be "busy" and not able to communicate at all;

Those who have passed over may be very proficient at communicating with the living, or very inept; the inept communicators usually have a facilitator or guide;

Communication is almost always made when the experiencer least expects it--during sleep, or during a dream or daydream. The conscious ego apparently needs to be "turned off" for the communication to occur.

I personally believe that there is a sort of consciousness hierarchy that is always attempting to communicate with the living. This hierarchy consists not just of the "dead" but of "guides" and other interested parties. Many of us who pass on become part of this hierarchy and assume a role in the continued guidance of the living. My next post will examine an evidential ADC with a number of veridical details.

Is my cookie notice working?

So I let my blog lie dormant for a few weeks, only to return and discover that I, owner of said blog (well, not actually the "owner"), must now my advise my European readers that Blogger uses cookies. It would seem that with Russia in the east and Iran in the southeast, Europeans would have bigger fish to fry.  (Apologies to the European Russians. I would also apologize to the Iranians, but Blogger is probably blocked to them.)  Since I personally do not actually derive any benefit from these cookies, monetary or otherwise, I think that Google adding this warning to my blog(s) on my behalf is the very least that they can do, in exchange for the excellent content that I provide, which in turn drives their Adsense and facilitates in the collection of information from various "end users." And collect, they do. Not that there's anything wrong with that. That's why you click on the "I agree" button. Google collects *everything*. Which is okay. I guess. I like Google. I'm also fully aware that I'm being collected.

HOWEVER.... Google also advises me (in this case, as end user of Blogger services) that it is my responsibility to confirm, to wit:

[that] this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays.

This I cannot do, since, to paraphrase Nowhere Man, it's my policy never to read what I write. This notice, therefore, serves as my waiver of responsibility to verify the functionality of aforementioned Cookie Monster to Europeans (and possibly Iranians).

Regular post to follow.

Monday, December 5, 2016

The death of Michael Newton and the rehabilitation of Melvin Morse

Michael Newton passed away in September; something motivated me to check, which led me to his Wikipedia entry, which led me to the obituary. He wrote several seminal books about the afterlife, compiled from his own method of regressive hypnosis. The use of hypnosis as a diagnostic tool for recovering hidden memories is controversial. I am not informed enough, medically, to have a firm opinion on it, except to argue that if hypnosis is used, it should be used by a licensed medical professional, for obvious legal and ethical reasons. This is where Newton fell into a gray area. Several online critics questioned Newton's credentials. I did a cursory search and couldn't find any proof that he had a "real" PhD, as he claimed, but this is not unusual. I don't know how to find out if anyone has any degree, without contacting the candidate's school--and in Newton's case, I never could find out. The online obits did not identify the schools, except to say that he "graduated from the University of Arizona (1953) and later earned advanced degrees from California colleges."

So, unless someone embarks on a Michael Newton biography, we may never know.

Today I was surprised to receive an email from Dr. Raymond Moody's email list updating everyone on a new collaboration between Dr. Moody and Dr. Melvin Morse, who has recently been released from prison on a "misdemeanor" (though if he has been in prison for more than 364 days, it's likely a felony charge). This of course led me to Wikipedia (my one-stop shop for the current conventional wisdom), which is updated with new info on his recent child endangerment conviction. The current Wikipedia edit seems to suggest that Morse's actions were overblown and not as heinous as early reports suggested (specifically, that he had waterboarded his stepdaughter to induce an NDE).  Again, I'm really not sure that I have an informed opinion on this case. Despite claims that it was all overblown, however, I'm not sure that Americans are being routinely sentenced to prison on trumped-up charges just yet. (This may soon change, however.) For now, anyway, a felony is a felony.

My basic opinion still stands, however... if we are presuming to instruct people on what to believe on spiritual or metaphysical matters, we (and our research) should be beyond approach, even in our current post-fact reality.

Monday, November 7, 2016

Delving into the NDE skeptical perspective

Lately my reading has taken a turn toward NDE research primarily. After circling the subject for several years, I've finally decided that research into near-death experiences provides the "best" hope of bridging the gap between our material consensus reality, and the "paranormal"--those experiences that fall outside the consensus.

So I was surprised to discover that there is a growing body of "skeptical" studies that examine NDEs from a medical/scientific perspective.  These skeptical studies tend to focus on a few well-documented NDE cases and attempt to find psychological or medical analogues that explain the paranormal experiences. The intent seems to be to dispel, disprove, or invalidate "supernatural" explanations.

This approach has some merit. A well-know (and possibly apocryphal) superstition held that sailing past the horizon caused one to fall off the planet. This belief was subjected to rigorous experimentation by a number of mariners, and ultimately was disproved (or so the story goes).  And thus died a popular superstition.

To dispel superstition and unreasoned belief is a noble endeavor and one of the greatest achievements of science. Any budding paranormalist ought not gainsay it. To argue, "Yes, the scientific method is good at determining the laws of genetic inheritance with pea plants, but it won't quite work with Aunt Sally's NDE," will neither invalidate the scientific method, nor "prove" Aunt Sally's NDE.

At the same time, arguing that the numinous effects of an NDE are "probably" the result of brain chemicals may be just as wrong.  The effects may be caused by something that, at our present level, we don't have the tools, or intellect, to comprehend.  Just because something *seems* to be something, does not mean that it really is.

The thinking paranormalist, then, defaults to the argument that, lacking a medical explanation for the NDE, it seems logical to assume that the NDE is what it purports to be: a "supernatural" experience of unknown origin or cause.

Not everything needs to be explained to be understood.  It doesn't bother me that I can't explain, or trace the origin, of an NDE. This fact does not make the NDE not-real for me. Unfortunately, science is not wired that way. Science seeks to deconstruct a phenomenon until it is understood or explained.  As it stands now, I don't think that science has succeeded in achieving this with the NDE. And I'd be more comfortable with the scientific approach if science were simply to admit, "What causes NDEs?  We don't know."

Sunday, October 2, 2016

Donald Trump, and the Mexican problem

I don't really like to blog about politics--most minds are made up, and those that aren't, won't be persuaded by anything I have to say--but I do have a small contribution to the subject that (to my knowledge) no one else has mentioned... it's part of a broader area of inquiry that many paranormal researchers (except UFO abduction partisans) overlook: the subject of dreams. Years ago I stumbled upon a small book entitled "The Third Reich of Dreams: The Nightmares of a Nation, 1933-39."  The book is long out-of-print and difficult to find. But it's a fascinating window into the psyches of ordinary Germans as their country fell under totalitarian control. German fascism (as all totalitarian movements) sought not only to control peoples' actions and lives, but also their thoughts, and ultimately, their dreams. But does this same principle work in "ordinary" political situations, in nominal democracies?  Is it possible for politicians to tap into subconscious and subliminal fears and exploit them?

To partially address this question, I submit the following, snippets of dreams that I've recorded and mostly forgot about, until recently. I did a simple search of my dreams beginning in 1991, and nowhere is there any reference to, or discussion of, Mexican nationals, until 2010. And then, suddenly, this appeared:

I went to the parking lot and saw that there was a fancy red '50s car was parked near my truck. I thought that it was driven by my brother or my father but discovered instead that it was owned by some menacing Mexicans.  I left the truck to go back to the building and when I returned a while later I found to my horror that my vehicle (which became a black van) had been stolen by the Mexicans. I raised my keys, however, and floated through the air to where the van had been dumped, which was over some hills in a wooded alcove.  The van was turned over on its hood, and people were crawling out of it.  I said that I would insist that the vehicle be totaled so that I could get full value for it.  (November 14, 2010)

I dreamed that I was returning from a visit to some place.  I visited a sort of enclave that was filled with Mexicans.  It looked a bit shabby, filled with booths selling goods.  I was also looking for my blue camping cooler, which I was obsessed with locating.  It had the blue ice bricks in it.  I asked one of the Mexicans about it, and he showed me a blue cooler, but I recognized it as not being mine.  I was staying at a family's house.  The whole dream had a strange feel to it.  (December 16, 2010)

And then, in 2015:

This morning I had a series of dreams about moving into a house. Some men from that area came to the kitchen door of the house, which opened to the street. One of them was soliciting for a contribution. He said the he and several with him were trying to raise money to travel back to Mexico. I said that I would give him money if he promised to share it with his friends, and he agreed. I gave him five dollars and he promptly said that he would keep it for himself. I chided him for this, but I got the impression that these weren't bad people. I saw a menacing person approach and I got my Magnum and put it nearby. A bit later, I was talking with one of the men and they admitted that they were "dead."  I thought that having a pistol, then, was unnecessary.

At the time that I transcribed the dreams, I thought little of them (I do tend to have strange dreams), but now I wonder: Where did they come from?  I do not consciously harbor any prejudice against Mexican citizens. My personal experience with Mexico has always been positive.  But the stereotype of the "menacing" or shabby Mexican surfaced in my dreams long before it became a political issue. Is this a subliminal image that I somehow picked up from the universally negative coverage of Mexico by the American media?  If so--who has a vested interest in its creation, and exploitation?

Thursday, September 8, 2016

Dream about Proxima Centauri

I went to sleep last night pondering the "men-in-black" phenomenon, and generally thinking that the overall UFO experience is unlikely to be material craft piloted by biological entities from other planets--for reasons apparent to many students of the same. Basic common sense (and a rudimentary understanding of science) is all you need to have.  Even assuming that biological life is universal--a reasonable assumption--intelligent life would be rare. We have evidence that it's evolved only once in the billion-or-so years on Earth (although I suspect that it's happened more than once), and sapient, biological life would probably have a short life span--a few thousand years--before it self-destructs, or evolves out of the physical plane.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that an intelligent biological species--one that is "intelligent" enough to manipulate the material of the host planet sufficiently to leave the host--has a life span of ten thousand earth years, with maybe one thousand years, max, of space travel, before it evolves out of the physical, or gets blasted by the Romulans. Such a species would require several hundred million earth years, under ideal conditions, to evolve from unicellular life, to a developed, space-faring biological entity, only to flame out (or leave the physical system) at the end.

(These limitations, by the way, is probably why intelligent life did not evolve on Mars--there simply was not enough time for it to do so, during the relatively brief period during which Mars was habitable.)

Now, these are very simplistic assumptions, and they are quite possibly incorrect--we simply do not have any data about the evolution of life on any planet other than Earth--but they are reasonable ones.

So, within (say) a one-thousand-lightyear radius of Earth, let's assume that intelligent life has evolved ten times, somewhere, on a habitable planet.  Or maybe twenty times.  It doesn't really matter.

Let's say that such a species developed a warp drive and could beat the speed of light, so that they could even travel to Earth quickly if "they" wanted to.  There is still one insurmountable barrier, and that barrier is time.... Not distance, as we might assume, but time. Assuming that an evolved biological species has a lifespan of several thousand years, their period of high technological development may have been several million years ago, or one hundred thousand years in the future. Such a species visiting Earth would have encountered either homo erectus preparing for an ice age, or the remnants of a nuclear holocaust or (more likely) a planet made less habitable by a runaway greenhouse effect. They would not encounter "us," "now."

It is still possible for such a species to visit us and harass UFO experiencers with non-disclosure threats, but only if they are proficient at time travel... And they would have to locate us, out of the vast expanse of the universe, not only "here," but "now."

Vast expanses of time as well as distance separate us, now, from any intelligent biological species that may have evolved elsewhere.  The casual ET hypothesis believer has a mental picture of hundreds, maybe thousands, of intelligent biological species, all existing "now" and all visiting Earth, in our time, in our space, to conduct experiments that superficially resemble our scientific method. While it's possible, it's not likely.  Any beings visiting us "now" are likely doing so in a form that is incomprehensible to us, and are only appearing as physical simply because we have no other way (yet) of perceiving them. They have evolved beyond our limited physical form.

Again, all of the above is based on very primitive assumptions based on a rudimentary understanding of physical science, and are probably "wrong"--but they are not unreasonable.  They are more reasonable than the assumptions of those who argue that UFOs are physical craft built by biological entities, somewhat like us, from nearby planets.

These are my beliefs and assumptions, and I am constantly turning them over and examining them as I read the various (and intriguing) accounts of UFO experiencers, of which I am one.

So it was very strange this morning to have an elaborate, vivid dream informing me that there exists an intelligent physical species on a planet around Proxima Centauri--not Alpha Centauri, but the red dwarf Proxima Centauri, 4.2 lightyears away. With a warp drive, they could get here in a month. The dream flies not only in the face of everything I assume, but also of what I know.... We all know that the two primary alien races visiting Earth are the water-based evolved beings from the Pleiades, and the evil grays from Zeta Reticuli--NOT Proxima Centauri.

So, I await further contact, and will revise my assumptions accordingly.

Monday, July 11, 2016

Wrapping up Richard Dolan's book and starting two others

I have been reading Richard Dolan's "The Coverup Exposed" on my lunch hour (on those occasions when I get a lunch break), and I've been able to enjoy it by keeping a couple of thoughts in mind... First, Dolan seems to lean toward the extra-terrestrial hypothesis. I'm not sure that I do, but that's okay.  Neither one of us knows for sure. Still, I have to filter his analysis through a different lens. Whereas Dolan sees physical-seeming craft engaging in all sorts of tricksterish behavior with an implicit goal of monitoring or engaging our technological state, visible to anyone who stumbles upon them, I see apparitions of craft appearing to specific individuals; or, more possibly, specific (select) people who are somehow able to peek behind our physical curtain, and see things outside our consensus physical reality that most usually can't.  Second, some of the cases that are cited as authoritative have problems, and I've gotten into the habit of checking them out to see if they have been "debunked."  (A handful apparently have been.)  But I don't fault Dolan. He has created a monumental study of hundreds of cases, but they were compiled BG (before Google).  Since I haven't done the research myself or written my own UFO book, I can't gainsay anything of Dolan's.

So I'm now on to Timothy Green Beckley's "Mystery Of The Men In Black" and "Humanoid Encounters" by Albert Rosales. I actually think that the MIB phenomenon is more interesting than the UFOs it purports to represent, but I haven't found many serious studies on it. Cross-discipline paranormalists spend much energy wondering if MIB and various humanoid sightings are "connected" somehow to UFOs, and what it all might "mean"--but I wonder why, if it's a physical phenomenon, it's not more universally observable.  It seems like it should be, if, in fact, it is physical.