David Thompson - Personal Message

Quite LeroyC, however, I think that Waller is really suggesting he cannot and should not take anyone else's word for it being David. He is looking for assurance "beyond any reasonable doubt."

On that basis he is entitled to remain uncertain or unconvinced by our remarks.

As noted on the Scott Milligan thread, I have taken David's remarks about the content of the thread on Scott and found myself in agreement with his comments. As a result the thread has been edited to remove unfair or objectionable remarks. We were pleased to see Scott come on the forum and had no desire to castigate him or see him treated unfairly. His comments regarding his mediumship were relevant and of interest to many on the forum.

Equally David's comments on this thread are welcome, whether or not we agree with all his opinions.

There is one comment David made in his opening post on this thread that I must address before I forget or the thread moves on to other topics.

David made remarks regarding a 'transfiguration demonstration' at our centre some time ago - I quite agree with what he wrote. The event was not a success and 'evidence' was in short supply.

Of course, such events are experiments - just as physical séances are - and some prove successful while others are not. I can think of a trance and psychic surgery demonstration at our centre some years ago which equally failed to provide evidence and proved to be quite disillusioning for certain participants, yet it, like other events, whether successful or not, may still prove to have value in other regards. We can all learn from such activities and good or bad, successful or unsuccessful, they add to our learning and help people to be discerning and grow in understanding of what is a very complex subject.

I, for one, am glad that David has chosen to write on this forum. Even if we hold different viewpoints, discussion of the issues, from the perspective of the medium, and from that of the observer, can only help lead to a greater understanding of what is mediumship.

.

Waller wrote: put down the bullhorn, let your work speak for itself and quit endlessly debating subjects which will inevitably end in nothing being resolved.

I couldn't agree more. This is the acid test.

As an aside. I don't know if David Thompson practices is physical mediumship in trance, if so, it occurred to me that perhaps he doesn't know who this Cadwell person is either. Maybe someone needs to put the questions directly to the person (ie Mr Cadwell) concerned at a seance? I can't see why there would be any objection to a genuine enquiry along those lines.

Although it is interesting to chat to mediums on forums like this, it isn't particularly useful from an evidential angle, although I can see that those who are already convinced of mediumship would get something from it.

Asking mediums who perform their task in trance, how it works, may not reveal much more than listening to recordings of their seances, since they may not have any real insight into the purported communicators.

 

  

Waller wrote:

obiwan wrote:

Waller wrote: put down the bullhorn, let your work speak for itself and quit endlessly debating subjects which will inevitably end in nothing being resolved.

I couldn't agree more. This is the acid test.

As an aside. I don't know if David Thompson practices is physical mediumship in trance, if so, it occurred to me that perhaps he doesn't know who this Cadwell person is either. Maybe someone needs to put the questions directly to the person (ie Mr Cadwell) concerned at a seance? I can't see why there would be any objection to a genuine enquiry along those lines.

I agree, Wan, but according to this account, don't expect that William will be responding.

Zammit, William and Who The Heck Is J.W.

"Victor: William has stated that he wishes to retain his privacy about his own life and does not want to debate the matter...I totally agree with him. There could be many reasons why he doesn't want the facts of his life investigated. The Controls in the Scole experiments took the same line. It is irrelevant and immaterial in the extreme where and when he was born and buried. The critical thing is this: even if we had all the specific details of William, all the specific details would not give what he says any more credibility. For the last time, get off this one – it’s irrelevant. We know of many other well known afterlife entities many of us unqualifiedly accept where we have no details at all who they were when on earth. Of far more interest is the physical phenomena he is able to produce and the quality of the evidence given by materialized entitites who are recognized by people they knew in life."

Hm well whether it's relevant or not isn't really for Victor Zammit or anyone else to say. I think it's a personal judgement. If the purported communicator wanted to his identity kept secret why mention it? Or why not just assume a pseudonym and be open about it. It's not a satisfactory answer IMHO.

What is true is that that the key is the quality of evidence of survival given to sitters at the seance. Of course it's hard to know how much credit to give their reports unless one knows them personally or they have some public reputation for probity it seems to me.

Waller wrote:

obiwan wrote:
Although it is interesting to chat to mediums on forums like this, it isn't particularly useful from an evidential angle, although I can see that those who are already convinced of mediumship would get something from it.

Asking mediums who perform their task in trance, how it works, may not reveal much more than listening to recordings of their seances, since they may not have any real insight into the purported communicators.

Muegge chats off-seance with Hans Bender, don't remember right off about Thompson and William. Muegge records some/all of his seances so he does hear what Bender is saying. Some mediums have ongoing communication with their spirit guides and controls (D. D. Home), others like Paladino claimed they did not.

Yes, Leslie Flint too.

  

  

Waller wrote:

obiwan wrote:

Waller wrote: put down the bullhorn, let your work speak for itself and quit endlessly debating subjects which will inevitably end in nothing being resolved.

I couldn't agree more. This is the acid test.

As an aside. I don't know if David Thompson practices is physical mediumship in trance, if so, it occurred to me that perhaps he doesn't know who this Cadwell person is either. Maybe someone needs to put the questions directly to the person (ie Mr Cadwell) concerned at a seance? I can't see why there would be any objection to a genuine enquiry along those lines.

I agree, Wan, but according to this account, don't expect that William will be responding.

Zammit, William and Who The Heck Is J.W.

"Victor: William has stated that he wishes to retain his privacy about his own life and does not want to debate the matter...I totally agree with him. There could be many reasons why he doesn't want the facts of his life investigated. The Controls in the Scole experiments took the same line. It is irrelevant and immaterial in the extreme where and when he was born and buried. The critical thing is this: even if we had all the specific details of William, all the specific details would not give what he says any more credibility. For the last time, get off this one – it’s irrelevant. We know of many other well known afterlife entities many of us unqualifiedly accept where we have no details at all who they were when on earth. Of far more interest is the physical phenomena he is able to produce and the quality of the evidence given by materialized entitites who are recognized by people they knew in life."

There are a lot of issues in this but some need dealing with sensitively. Firstly  I am surprised that people do not know that David is in trance throughout his Trance healing and Physical Mediumship. However every one of his Haymist, in the UK, the original Australian Ausimist circle and COSC circles (since COSC commences in June 2006) were recorded so he gets to hear what occurred subsequently.

This is quite normal in deep trance circles. When I met Lis over 30 years ago she was a deep trance medium for one group and the sessions were all recorded on a reel to reel recorder operated in another room and activated once trance commenced. The medium knows nothing about who comes through or what is being said. It is the job of the circle leader to test the Spirits and the group to ask questions. Yes there are records of mediums, especially Etta Wriedt, being out of trance and participating in the conversation. However, generally the depth of the trance helps ensure minimal interference from the medium's own subconscious (As an act of synchronicity Carlos Alvarado's latest blog touches on this area  http://carlossalvarado.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/speculations-about-mediumship-dissociation-and-the-subconscious-mind/ ).

Now since David's arrival in Australia a comprehensive picture of William Charles Cadwell appeared, about his life and work date of birth and date of death. This comprehensive picture was added to when an apport of the sewing kit William Charles Cadwell's Mother used was brought through at a séance at the Sarasota Center of Light (where you will be attending a séance with David Waller, they used to display this apport on their web site but it is not their now although I have a saved version of the page). This was highly detailed and I know, from meeting David that he was entirely committed to the reality of William.

Indeed it was only when Lis was trying to get the certificates of Birth and Death as a gift for David in 2007 (when he came back to Adelaide to do some Seances in someones private séance room) that we realised there was a problem.

Victor's piece was in response to one of the 37 questions, when he realised that in fact William Charles Cadwell had not existed (and yes we know comprehensively now that neither Guy Lyon Playfair nor Montagu Keene had actually done any detailed research to justify the claim they had proved his existence) he wrote the piece to say that it did not matter because most guides did not provide any provenance.

I think Victor was wrong and the real existence of WCC did matter for David himself, which is why this is a sensitive issue which must not be roughly handled. It is probably a matter of debate whether it is a real issue but whilst I accept that most people do not have guides who's existence can be confirmed (albeit by total happen stance I received proof of one of my guides some 28 years after I first connected with them) my personal feeling is that once one does give that information there should be an expectation that it is genuine.

I am quite sure that David felt WCC was a real person too and am at a loss to understand why it has now become Caldwell, a red herring that in turn calls the apport in Florida into question

This is old material but given the way this thread has been progressing the reality of the facts are becoming  obfuscated by the opinions Waller is writing. I am concerned that the somewhat arrogant presentation is taking away from a contact that David was willing to make with this forum. Indeed I believe that the direct contact you made asking him to confirm his reality was the height of bad manners, especially as you had confirmation from both forum owners and from a friend of David LeroyC.

You may consider this appropriate for your blog but it is not appropriate on here. I also doubt that your demand on him personally will be acted upon, indeed were I in his position I would just ignore you, although David may now wonder if your attendance at a séance could possibly place him at risk.

I hope this tends to draw the attention back to where this thread started - the contact by David Thompson.

Now when William became WCC is uncertain my long conversations with Paul Barker, David's Haymist Circle leader indicate that originally he was just plain William at first.

Hi everyone, I'm shocked to read anyone gives David a thought after so many unanswered questions and shenanigans over the years ,in other words who cares. His own circle leader in Aus didn't have a good word to say about him and split, after a while you realise what a croc it is  :suspect:

You put your views very succinctly Micky. I hope life is treating you well and you are still managing to balance work, family and your work for Spirit as a medium. Nice to hear you again.

Jim

Hi mickyb   

Waller wrote:

obiwan wrote:

Waller wrote:

obiwan wrote:
Although it is interesting to chat to mediums on forums like this, it isn't particularly useful from an evidential angle, although I can see that those who are already convinced of mediumship would get something from it.

Asking mediums who perform their task in trance, how it works, may not reveal much more than listening to recordings of their seances, since they may not have any real insight into the purported communicators.

Muegge chats off-seance with Hans Bender, don't remember right off about Thompson and William. Muegge records some/all of his seances so he does hear what Bender is saying. Some mediums have ongoing communication with their spirit guides and controls (D. D. Home), others like Paladino claimed they did not.

Yes, Leslie Flint too.

Hm, Flint did or did not have ongoing communication with Mickey and Dr. Marshall?

Save me from having to pop open my copy of "Voices In The Dark".   

It seems he certainly could have. On some recordings you can hear Lesley Flint speaking as well as Mickey. In fact I recall hearing from Zerdini that Mickey sometimes complained to Leslie that it would be a lot better if he was in trance, but that Leslie didn't like the idea anymore. I don't know about the Dr Marsahall character.

@Admin - personally, I'm happy to accept that it is the real person posting as David Thompson, especially so as you have more information. In any event I can't see what motivation there would be for anyone to impersonate him.

It is a good opportunity - for those with an interest - to ask him the questions that have been raised in the past - and I agree; as long as it's done in a genuine spirit (no pun intended) of interest and not to relight the embers of earlier conflicts.

As for Mickyb's observation - it is David Thompson that seems to have opened the discussion again as I don't recall reading much discussion of him or the questions on here recently.

The only two things that I know Obi are Chris Hoods post and the other one where suddenly we had Caldwell appeared to replace Cadwell on David's site.
Jim

"It is a good opportunity - for those with an interest - to ask him the questions that have been raised in the past - and I agree; as long as it's done in a genuine spirit (no pun intended) of interest and not to relight the embers of earlier conflicts."

It would be a good opportunity if the new member were to return....

mac wrote:"It is a good opportunity - for those with an interest - to ask him the questions that have been raised in the past - and I agree; as long as it's done in a genuine spirit (no pun intended) of interest and not to relight the embers of earlier conflicts."

It would be a good opportunity if the new member were to return....

Honestly, you're so pushy sometimes   

obiwan wrote:

mac wrote:"It is a good opportunity - for those with an interest - to ask him the questions that have been raised in the past - and I agree; as long as it's done in a genuine spirit (no pun intended) of interest and not to relight the embers of earlier conflicts."

It would be a good opportunity if the new member were to return....

Honestly, you're so pushy sometimes   

Yep I'm a little bugger!   

  

Well it's a week since the original posting and we're still waiting for you-know-who to return and re-engage with members and their questions.  I'm trying hard not to be cynical but it's kinda what I was expecting....