PN seeks mediums for experiment

In tomorrow's PN online now. Experienced mediums of ten years standing or more sought by PN to be investigated by four as yet unidentified researchers.
Should be interesting to see who volunteers and who the experts are. Just a trawl for mediums to participate in the current article. Respondents will receive a questionairre.
This new look PN just gets better and better.

KatyKing wrote:In tomorrow's PN online now. Experienced mediums of ten years standing or more sought by PN to be investigated by four as yet unidentified researchers.
Should be interesting to see who volunteers and who the experts are. Just a trawl for mediums to participate in the current article. Respondents will receive a questionairre.
This new look PN just gets better and better.

An opportunity for you to put your money where your mouth is Pete

Good Lord why would I ever want to do that bro?
I have, quite literally; nothing to prove not a sausage, nada. It's not mine, I don't own it, it's a gift that remains the possession of the Giver.
Only evidence I ever get to see or hear comes via sitters. Look up the word 'clueless' in the dictionary and it could well say 'see under Pete Keeffe'
I take my hat off to anyone having a go though and do hope that they get some suitable volunteers.

Come on Peter Give it a go! If the new PN is to keep getting better it needs this type of contribution.

I'll maybe send for the questionnaire. Must admit it has piqued my curiosity as to who is intending to do what, why and to whom.
Can't see myself 'surrounded by scientists' though like that German PM we know apparently is.
I'm a giggler, they might take offence.

If they mean physical mediumship, history shows us that genuine PM's would be mad to take up this offer. The number of times investigators have set up conditions, obtained phenomena which they accepted, then refused it later on. Some notable exceptions, like Sir William Crookes, but even he was ignored or abused for telling the truth as he saw it. Mental mediums I don't know, hasn't that been done in the USA with three mediums achieving well above average with messages?

normy wrote:If they mean physical mediumship, history shows us that genuine PM's would be mad to take up this offer. The number of times investigators have set up conditions, obtained phenomena which they accepted, then refused it later on. Some notable exceptions, like Sir William Crookes, but even he was ignored or abused for telling the truth as he saw it. Mental mediums I don't know, hasn't that been done in the USA with three mediums achieving well above average with messages?

Now your talking normy that would be a good idea, physical experiment, could give Scott Milligan, David Thompson, Stewart Alexander, Bill Meadow and few others an opportunity to demonstrate there phenomena. Then PN could publish it's findings. If you were the genuine article, why wouldn't you. Perhaps, PN could invite them to take part in a series of experiments. If I was a PM, I would jump at the chance.

Depends who you read normy. There isn' a single piece of irrefutable peer reviiewd and replicable evidence from all the yars of research. Conclusions seem conditional upon who was investigating.
I'For the momen we are looking for mediums of ten or more years experience who are interested in taking part in a number of non invasive mutually agreed experiments in an attempt to better understand the many ways in which communication with the next world can take place. Age and gender are immaterial'PN p 4 Mag 14 of June 22nd 2012.
Elsewhere in same article.....
'Every day quantum physics is uncovering more about the unseen aspects of the universe'
A sentence that has me thinking of butterflies and sledgehammers for some reason.

I'm sorry mark, perhaps you misunderstand me. I'm saying that, IF I was a genuine PM, I would be mad to subject myself to their methods and cowardice if it was like in the past. Genuine PM's stay in their home circles and produce survival evidence and healing, because of the harmony and conditions. They might invite guests at times, but sensationalism, phenomena in the dark, and greedy money making, is not for them.

normy wrote:I'm sorry mark, perhaps you misunderstand me. I'm saying that, IF I was a genuine PM, I would be mad to subject myself to their methods and cowardice if it was like in the past. Genuine PM's stay in their home circles and produce survival evidence and healing, because of the harmony and conditions. They might invite guests at times, but sensationalism, phenomena in the dark, and greedy money making, is not for them.

Times are different now normy if physical mediums are going out working in public making money they should at least subject themselves to experiments if they claim they produce the real deal, and who better than PN to arrange a series of tests, Maurice Barbanell did so for decades. That is my point.

Mark74 wrote:

normy wrote:I'm sorry mark, perhaps you misunderstand me. I'm saying that, IF I was a genuine PM, I would be mad to subject myself to their methods and cowardice if it was like in the past. Genuine PM's stay in their home circles and produce survival evidence and healing, because of the harmony and conditions. They might invite guests at times, but sensationalism, phenomena in the dark, and greedy money making, is not for them.

Times are different now normy if physical mediums are going out working in public making money they should at least subject themselves to experiments if they claim they produce the real deal, and who better than PN to arrange a series of tests, Maurice Barbanell did so for decades. That is my point.

I see what you mean then Mark. I don't really see the point though. Do we think that any public medium demonstrating in the dark is genuine? I don't personally, but if they were, I don't see how it could be proved. The only definite advantage would be perhaps exposing cheating, but that could be missed as well.

Many a direct voice medium sat in the dark and it was genuine normy. We only have to look at the work of Leslie Flint and Mrs Etta Wriedt.

I thought you were referring to present-day, Mark. The old direct voice mediums sat in home circles and and gave excellent survival evidence to guest sitters. The circle knew that it was genuine for them by their own senses and reason. Leslie Flint subjected himself to more scientific tests than any other medium, but still the voices came. As you probably know, he sat in a lit auditorium later in his development within a light-sealed cabinet where all could see it, and a microphone was placed in front of it about twenty inches away. The huge audience in full glare of lighting had a demo of independent direct voice comparable to those experienced only by small groups sitting in privacy. Now that would be something!

normy wrote:I thought you were referring to present-day, Mark. The old direct voice mediums sat in home circles and and gave excellent survival evidence to guest sitters. The circle knew that it was genuine for them by their own senses and reason. Leslie Flint subjected himself to more scientific tests than any other medium, but still the voices came. As you probably know, he sat in a lit auditorium later in his development within a light-sealed cabinet where all could see it, and a microphone was placed in front of it about twenty inches away. The huge audience in full glare of lighting had a demo of independent direct voice comparable to those experienced only by small groups sitting in privacy. Now that would be something!

I was referring to the light with regard to direct voice, it can differ, Etta also sat in well lit rooms and the voices came. Colin Fry is a superb direct voice medium, why he doesn't continue to sat is such a shame. I know his autobiography is out now will look forward to it. I wouldn't be keen on the route he is after taking with his mediumship, but then again he is only human and unfortunately some mediums get caught up in the celebrity world of showbiz mediumship, which is quite tacky.

KatyKing wrote:There isn' a single piece of irrefutable peer reviiewd and replicable evidence from all the yars of research. Conclusions seem conditional upon who was investigating.

Well, well, KK. So you have read EVERY record of seances, EVERY piece of research, EVERY investigation into physical phenomena that has taken place around the world and in every country since Spiritualism began in 1848, and as such you are able to provide us with the definitive answer that you have. How very impressive! It must be very satisfying to have the intellect, the analytical skills, not to mention the resources to have undertaken such an intensive level of research and evaluation.

I can't think of any replicable irrefutable scientific experiment which would provide acceptable evidence of the paranormal for mainstream science at the moment. The very nature of the psychic is not replicable, each event is separate and different from each other as far as I can see. However, parts of the scientific method can be used like controls etc and proper data collection, it should be a combination of both. ( Or is that me compromising all the time? )

Science is two-faced though. Proper peer reviewed science is done on much which is not a replicable or directly observed experiment. For example, some parts of geology, biology, astronomy are theories which depend on induction and deduction back to the source. That's OK and we can believe the scientists, but they don't do the same for the paranormal, because in general the materialist edifice would be threatened, and the best evidence is not even looked at as a rule. The source theory for the paranormal is hidden in human history and is subjective, whereas the material source theory is objective and all around us. Having at last rid us of superstition and it's evils, I can't blame the scientists really for holding on to what they've achieved.

Mark74 wrote:

normy wrote:I thought you were referring to present-day, Mark. The old direct voice mediums sat in home circles and and gave excellent survival evidence to guest sitters. The circle knew that it was genuine for them by their own senses and reason. Leslie Flint subjected himself to more scientific tests than any other medium, but still the voices came. As you probably know, he sat in a lit auditorium later in his development within a light-sealed cabinet where all could see it, and a microphone was placed in front of it about twenty inches away. The huge audience in full glare of lighting had a demo of independent direct voice comparable to those experienced only by small groups sitting in privacy. Now that would be something!

I was referring to the light with regard to direct voice, it can differ, Etta also sat in well lit rooms and the voices came. Colin Fry is a superb direct voice medium, why he doesn't continue to sat is such a shame. I know his autobiography is out now will look forward to it. I wouldn't be keen on the route he is after taking with his mediumship, but then again he is only human and unfortunately some mediums get caught up in the celebrity world of showbiz mediumship, which is quite tacky.

I must look up Etta, I know she's well regarded, but somehow I've missed that her DV work was in the light. .

Leslie Flint's encounters with SPR and scientists have influenced my thinking. Chapter 11 of his book Voices in the dark explains how he endured arduous conditions like strips of elastopolast taped on his mouth, a scarf tied over this, tied up etc., administered by a Dr West of the SPR himself. Voices happened. West removed the ties etc then the elastoplast. Later, West sent Leslie a letter to the effect that he was not satisfied with the test sitting, because at the end he had observed one of the plasters sealing his lips was no longer in line with the pencil marking. I don't blame Leslie for refusing a second test, he could hardly breathe and was exhausted, no way I would go through that, and still be told it was of no value.

On a much lower level, I have proved the paranormal for myself by means of table tilting with no hands on it. OK, science doesn't accept the paranormal. What would sceptical scientists think if they witnessed it?
So far, Jo Bradley has been able to replicate table movement on her own which I, and others, have been unable to. Large trestle tables were used, sliding on a stone floor, which offered a lot of frictional resistance. By either pushing or pulling the table with hands only on the plastic top, it was quite difficult, as there was no sideways pressure, only from the top. I was able to push the table slowly and jerkily around the room using a lot of effort. Jo, much smaller and lighter than me, was able at will to walk smoothly and easily round the hall pushing or pulling the table as though it was on wheels. Which I videoed.
Now, if a scientific investigator witnessed this, and was challenged to replicate it, would he take the challenge, and if he failed would he put it down to trickery by Jo? How would he explain it in normal terms? I'm just speculating here as I'm enjoying these discussions.

Isn't it strange that gravity can't be seen but has scientifically proven to exist. Radiation can't be seen has but also been proven to exist. Yet when it comes to unseen forces that are moving tables, bending spoons, and manifesting the human form, science seems to be very close minded on the whole..

Wes wrote:Isn't it strange that gravity can't be seen but has scientifically proven to exist. Radiation can't be seen has but also been proven to exist. Yet when it comes to unseen forces that are moving tables, bending spoons, and manifesting the human form, science seems to be very close minded on the whole..

Never thought of it like that that - but your right.