Physical mediumship in dark or light ???

Swordmaiden wrote:Thanks you Martk74. Ceros was Italian, from the time of Pope Sixtus IV. He apparrently split from the church in Rome and became a herbalist, a bit of a maverick.  

Ceros was a figment of Paul's subconscious mind and nothing more.

KatyKing wrote:Who is/was Paul McElhoney?

Paul, was classed as a physical medium.. However, he was exposed as a fraud in the 1980s. Ron Baker headed up the team who exposed him. Gordon Higginson was involved, along with a considerable number of other people.

Azur wrote:  I remember some years ago there was fraud uncovered at the Arthur Findlay College, with some physical medium can't remember his name think he was from Liverpool area, but medium Glynn edward was involved as well, I remember it was a big shock Judith seaman was president at the time and it was covered up.  It's years since I have went to the college now but it would make you think.

I think you will find that it was Leonard Young who caught the fraudulent physical medium Richard.

Thank you Stelty its good to get information from people who were there

Hello forum:

Does anybody here know more about the alleged fraud of Kai Muegge?

See page 9 of the 2014 pdf program of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration in San Francisco; check their homepage under "Meetings" (sorry - new forum members are apparently not allowed to post full www links).


Pete

Very interesting report by Stephen Braude, now he first reviewed the Felix Group to much fanfare but here we see something quite different. Thanks for that post, I must check why you cannot post links.

http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/2014-SSE-Program.pdf
Investigation of the Felix Experimental Group: A Status Report
Stephen E. Braude
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy
University of Maryland Baltimore County
Editor-in-Chief, JSE
This talk summarizes and reports the latest developments of my investigation of the Felix
Experimental Group (FEG) and its exhibitions of classical physical mediumship. It’s
been nearly a century since investigators have had the opportunity to carefully study
standard spiritistic phenomena, including the extruding of ectoplasm, and the FEG is the
only current physical mediumistic circle permitting any serious controls.
At last year’s SSE conference I reported the progressively stringent séances I supervised
with the FEG, culminating in some very careful experiments with video documentation in
a secure and private location in Austria belonging to one of the investigators. These latter
séances yielded videos of a full table levitation, and also the medium apparently
extruding a large quantity of ectoplasm from his mouth, which then accumulated in an
apparently animated heap on the floor in front of him. The ectoplasm was produced
despite numerous controls, including a careful strip search of the medium, examination of
the medium’s clothes, and inspection of the cabinet in which he sat.
Recently, evidence has surfaced from séances other than those I’ve conducted suggesting
strongly that the FEG medium, Kai Muegge, may have resorted to fraud on several of
those occasions. Although this has clearly tarnished the case as a whole, it remains
unclear whether (or to what extent) the hypothesis of fraud can be deployed successfully
with respect to all the FEG phenomena, and my investigations in particular. Thus, it
remains unclear whether Kai’s mediumship deserves being classified charitably as a case
of “mixed” mediumship (combining both fraudulent and genuine phenomena). By
contrast, in several other, well-known, cases of mixed mediumship—for example that of
Eusapia Palladino, some phenomena seem quite clearly to be genuine. However, that
conclusion is warranted because Palladino (and others) produced phenomena under much
more stringent controls than Kai Muegge has so far allowed.
In this talk I’ll summarize the arguments both for and against the paranormality of the
FEG phenomena generally, and I’ll discuss what steps Kai must take to dispel the cloud
of suspicion currently hanging over all his phenomena.

That is only the abstract if anyone has the papers it would be worth a full read. Indeed DVD's of the conference can be obtained here. http://www.scientificexploration.org/meetings/past-conferences.html

Session 6 which, covers this presentation, can be ordered as a DVD here for $25 http://evolutioni.com/sse-conference-submission-page.html

I had seen and heard rumours but nothing really strong enough to put on here, so one wonders what Stephen Braude is reporting on and who is the source of information. Interesting that, of all the current crop of physical mediums, Kai is the only one to really push the boundaries on light and photography all the others prefer to remain in mushroom mode.

Well then, I'd suggest to stay tuned for the upcoming issue(s) of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.
Some time ago, Kai Muegge proudly announced on his blog that an issue featuring a paper by Stephen Braude about his mediumship was about to be published. But as it seems, this paper has not yet been published, and Muegge has removed this announcement from his blog again.
If Braude talked about fraud in his recent presentation at the SSE conference, he might have adapted his paper for the JSE accordingly.

Pete

Thanks Pete I will do.

I realise Kai was discussed on here a while back with conflicting views https://www.spiritualismlink.com/t1720p75-a-very-heavy-heart-about-all-this#18060

  

Perhaps he sees his job as being able to test Kai Muegge under the same conditions that he has tested other physical mediums, which isn't possible for some reason..

\"I don't understand. Why is Braude collecting and reporting anecdotal evidence on Kai Muegge? His job so to speak it is to look at his observable evidences and make judgments based on that data. Waller wrote:"]

Given Stephen Braude made those comments in both a written paper and to a large gathering at the conference I would be sure that he was certain about the information provided to him. It will be interesting to see the full presentation on DVD and his subsequent paper in the JSE.

Jim

Petco wrote:Hello forum:

Does anybody here know more about the alleged fraud of Kai Muegge?

See page 9 of the 2014 pdf program of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration in San Francisco; check their homepage under "Meetings" (sorry - new forum members are apparently not allowed to post full www links).


Pete

I do. Muegge has bought cobweb in the internet, luminous and non luminous in amounts of more than a kilo. When Michael Nahm wo was sitter and investigator of the FEG asked Muegge on cobweb he denied even knowing of such substances. Bad luck for Muegge Michael Nahm had first Hand evidence of the items Muegge bought in his hands. Muegge then stated he just wanted to see how this cobweb stuff varies from ectoplasm and it would be of completely different style. Michael Nahm then proved that the cobweb bought looked exactly like the ectoplams Muegge showed on some photos. More? Muegge deleted articles from his blog when faced by the question of cobweb and other incidents. But archive.org did not Forget and so the images and articles were still there!

There is much more to say but actually that answers your question I guess.

I did some rudimentary searches of archives.org but didn't turn up the blog mentioned above. Could you please provide some details about where to find it?

eternaltruths wrote:

Petco wrote:Hello forum:

Does anybody here know more about the alleged fraud of Kai Muegge?

See page 9 of the 2014 pdf program of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Society for Scientific Exploration in San Francisco; check their homepage under "Meetings" (sorry - new forum members are apparently not allowed to post full www links).


Pete

I do. Muegge has bought cobweb in the internet, luminous and non luminous in amounts of more than a kilo. When Michael Nahm wo was sitter and investigator of the FEG asked Muegge on cobweb he denied even knowing of such substances. Bad luck for Muegge Michael Nahm had first Hand evidence of the items Muegge bought in his hands. Muegge then stated he just wanted to see how this cobweb stuff varies from ectoplasm and it would be of completely different style. Michael Nahm then proved that the cobweb bought looked exactly like the ectoplams Muegge showed on some photos. More? Muegge deleted articles from his blog when faced by   the question of cobweb and other incidents. But archive.org did not Forget and so the images and articles were still there!

There is much more to say but actually that answers your question I guess.

Many thanks eternaltruths - how interesting.
That doesn't seem to throw a good light on Muegge.
Don't understand how precisely Nahm found out about all that - but I'll try to get the full papers of Braude AND Nahm.

Pete

OK here is a précis of the Journal of Scientific Exploration http://carlossalvarado.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/questions-about-the-physical-phenomena-of-the-felix-circle/

thank you, Jim - I appreciate your taking time to look this up for me.

  

That is rubbish Waller. He may be a JSE associate editor but his blog is excellent, well balanced and he is sympathetic to the idea of survival after death. Look at the last series of posts and you will find a treasure trove of links which would please almost everyone on this forum.

However, like all Parapsychologists he will never do other than seek decent test conditions not empirical invalidated testing by attending alone. Indeed if you look at the post directly before this one there are a series of reports on recent testing of mediums so it is natural he would now notify people about this one.

It may be an abstract but it gives a link to the place the entire report can be bought, I have previously given a link to the conference DVD. :Little more I can do to get you to follow up on this. It is important that supporters of PM adopt a more open, questioning mind about the possibilities that what they hear about may not all be genuine.

Look at the rich history of fraudulent Dark Séances and you have to realise that care and testing is actually a very valid idea.

Jim

Waller wrote:

"I don't understand. Why is Braude collecting and reporting anecdotal evidence on Kai Muegge? His job so to speak it is to look at his observable evidences and make judgments based on that data.  [/quote]

It seems to me, that this comments suggests Braude should only make judgements based on his own observable findings and not consider the observable findings of others. Anecdotal evidence he shouldn't take into consideration is the judgement of others based on their own observable findings.

Surely, any scientist when undertaking research into a given area should review all past and current material relating to the subject and weigh that up against their own findings. Their own findings may support or refute previous findings but I see no difficulty in taking those findings into consideration, especially when those findings highlight concerns also held by the scientist and come from observers who, like the scientist, have attempted to form their judgement based on the data available to them.

I personally doubt, though you may disagree Waller, that Braude and his colleague would have made public their position had they not also investigated the "anecdotal" evidence sufficiently to make a judgement based on an assessment of its value.

In a sense, however, our discussion is academic. Surely, if you feel their approach/action is wrong, you should be writing to them or to the publication in which their reports are found to challenge the veracity of their approach and the publication, not merely criticising them on this forum.

http://www.psychicnews.org.uk/articles/The-death-of-physical-mediumship-as-we-know-it

An article in the January 2015 edition of Psychic News (Issue No. 4123) on pp. 12-14 is headed “From the Editor – THE DEATH OF PHYSICAL MEDIUMSHIP AS WE KNOW IT? In it, Sue farrow, the editor, examines what she describes as “a controversial new document from the Arthur Findlay College.”

The document titled “Protocol for Physical Séances at the Arthur Findlay College and Arthur Findlay Centre,” lists eight protocols that from January 1, 2015 apply to psychical mediumship demonstrations at the above mentioned centres.

So that the views of the Editor of PN, and those of Scott Milligan, a medium who has up until this time been both demonstrating physical mediumship and offering tutorials and lectures on the subject at the AFC, might be put in the correct context it is worth setting out these protocols in full:
1. In principle there should be no séances held in total darkness. Subdued lighting including coloured lights or Natural light is preferable at all times.
If there is to be consideration given to ‘Dark Seances’ then the following is required:-
a) They must be filmed with infrared cameras. It would be invaluable if the AFC invested in a video system that uses multiple cameras that could be linked not only to a recording device but also to a monitor outside the séance room.
b) Night vision viewers are made available to watch events live during the séance and so have independent witnesses acting on behalf of those present. With these conditions in use there would be no need to secure a medium to the chair with cable ties.
Cabinets are of course permitted to be used, but should be searched by independent sitters prior to séance commencing. Trumpets and planchettes may also be used if requested by the spirit operatives. Sometimes percussion instruments may be utilised in the séance and small lightweight balls; all requests for equipment by the spirit operatives should be considered if sensible and appropriate.

2. All physical mediums should be assessed under test conditions before being allowed to work at AFC and a register of approved Physical mediums is kept just as for all college tutors.

3. Rooms where physical séances are to be held should be prepared correctly.
It is essential that the room has a good clean if ectoplasm is being produced.
All clutter to be removed and as much metal as possible as this depletes the energies being used. It is known that soft furnishing used to disintegrate over time in rooms used for physical séances, thus showing that everything in the room affects the conditions.

4. Sound is always important in a physical séance. Silence does not provide the right energy for physical mediumship. It is important to have vocal responses from the sitters about what they are experiencing or what they are not experiencing, so that these can be compared. We must remember that physical mediumship is witnessed by all present through the physical senses, therefore all should be perceiving the same thing at the same time. Music can be a great help in building the energy, but should not be so loud that it is distressing to the sitters and is not required to be played throughout the séance.

5. No sitters may bring into the room any type of telephone, camera or recording device.

6. Entry and exit to and from the room should be monitored at all times as someone entering or leaving without permission can have detrimental effects on the medium.

7. Finally, it must be remembered that a physical séance is not an entertainment or a fun show, but provides the opportunity for the intelligent minds of those in the spirit world to provide evidence of their survival in some quite amazing ways.

8. The medium or chairperson at a séance must give a pre-séance briefing to the sitters with details of what can and can’t be done during the séance, tailored to the individual medium who is working during the séance.

According to the advisory note that forms part of this document, the “purpose of this policy is to protect the reputation of both the Arthur Findlay College and Arthur Findlay Centre, and tutors working at these establishments.” It is also seen as a means of safeguarding “the wellbeing of any mediums working with physical mediumship within both College and Centre.” Finally, the document advises that in the compiling of this protocol policy guidance was received “from the Spirit World.”

It is, of course, the first protocol, including its two subsections that the editor and Scott Milligan appear to see as of concern and it is that protocol that has given rise to the emotive headline of the article.

David Bruton, the Principal of the Arthur Findlay College, and President of the Spiritualists’ National Union, sees in these protocols an opportunity to begin to further the scientific aspect of the Spiritualist movement, by putting in place “controls and safeguards which will meet the scrutiny of both internal stakeholders and the wider sceptical world.” He makes clear that the College is actively working towards collaboration with “the scientific and academic community and establishing a laboratory at the Hall, part funded by the Society for Psychical Research and Northampton University.” For Bruton, this, and the protocols are “building on the legacy left by Arthur Findlay when he gave his home to the Spiritualists’ National Union for the study of Psychic Sciences.”

Sue Farrow, editor of ‘Psychic News,’ takes the view that while we might all “long to see PM brought back into the light,” there are significant issues “about how this might be safely achieved,” and, “If it ever does happen, it certainly won’t be through a small handful of people (well-intentioned though they might be) instructing every demonstrating physical medium to switch on the camera and goggles and to hell with the risks!”

The “risks” associated with physical mediumship, an extremely rare form of mediumship the editor describes as “unique,” are, she suggests, related to the “extreme” sensitivity to light of “ectoplasm” a “substance extruded from the physical medium’s body.” While not quoting any authoritative examples from the past history of physical mediumship, Sue farrow argues “Many are the physical mediums who have sustained injuries because the sudden and unexpected introduction of light has caused the ectoplasm to return violently to the medium’s body, resulting in burns and bleeding.” While acknowledging that “almost everyone would agree that it would be ‘preferable’ to conduct séances in some degree of light,” Farrow questions whether “they would really wish to do this if it meant the physical medium . . . could well suffer injury?”

The article includes significant coverage of the views of Scott Milligan, who with the introduction of these rules for the demonstration of physical mediumship, has withdrawn from all his bookings at the College. At a meeting with Bruton and other officials of the AFC and SNU, Milligan was shown the protocols, and advised that it was not a reflection on his mediumship, “but a way forward for the College.” Milligan, however, took the view, based on “past investigation,” that he “could not fulfil the filming or night vision goggle requirements,” due he claims, “to the vibration that is emitted in infrared.” Nor was he willing to accept the opportunity offered to him by the College to test the use of any infrared camera in his home circle. According to Milligan, when he “sat for the spirit world, guidance was given that it would be unwise at this moment” of his “unfoldment to interfere by bringing modern technology into the sanctuary” of his home circle. In addition Milligan was concerned as to whether any “safeguards were to be put in place” to protect him if the camera were to “damage” his mediumship or his health when used in a séance.

Now, it is known that in the past both I and my husband Jim have given considerable support to the fight to save Psychic News when it was in danger of being lost to the world forever. On this occasion, however, I feel compelled to take a different position, and give my support to the decision made by the AFC and the protocols that they have put in place.

I fully endorse the need, as outlined by David Bruton, for the investigation of Spiritualism, and in particular physical mediumship, to be placed on a scientific footing. To once again work collaboratively with scientists and academics under controlled conditions is long overdue, and that the AFC and the SNU are actively pursuing that approach can only be commended. I am, as members of this forum no doubt are already aware, totally opposed to ‘Dark Séances,’ that is, séances held in total darkness; I don’t consider, as the editor of PN argues, “that it would be ‘preferable’ to conduct séances in some degree of light,” I consider it imperative. Until there is once more light, albeit subdued lighting reintroduced into the physical séance room, physical mediumship and Spiritualism will continue to be plagued with accusations of fraudulent mediums, and sadly, all too often such accusations have been warranted.

The history of physical mediumship, and in particular materialisation mediumship, is littered with fraud perpetrated in darkened séance rooms. And, in the total darkness that has been the trend in recent decades, there is no, and cannot be any, demonstration of what the editor describes as physical mediumship’s “most developed form,” – the “visible and audible manifestation” of the materialised spirit of a person who has previously passed from physical life into the realms of spirit. While indeed, the physical materialisation of a spirit is undoubtedly the “highest level” of physical mediumship, until this once again occurs in the séance room where there is light, no one can or will be able to “see, touch and speak with a loved one” that has physically manifested, and so prove that they have survived physical death.

I would also dispute Sue Farrow’s claim: “Traditionally, and with no confirmed exceptions in the Western world, this rare form of mediumship has undergone much of its development in the dark.” Perhaps more time spent in researching the records of Spiritualism and the development of physical mediumship and especially materialisation mediumship would be of benefit. In doing so it would become very clear, and quite quickly, that while what Spiritualists considered the “physical phenomena” of mediumship, that is, the movement of objects within the séance room, the ringing of bells, the winding up of the musical-box, the activity of the “speaking tube,” and the touching of sitters by unseen hands, etc., took place in the “Dark Séance,” with the medium remaining in the room restrained by the sitters, for the phenomena of “form-manifestation”- the materialisation of spirits, - Spiritualists held what they called the “Light Séance,” – with the medium seated inside the cabinet, more often than not restrained in a chair, and with the light in the séance room though subdued still bright enough for the sitters to be able to see each other, the room and, of course, to see the materialised spirit-forms that would emerge from within the cabinet or materialise and dematerialise outside the cabinet curtains.

I could give you hundreds of examples of the records that show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that materialisation séances were not held in the total darkness. Spiritualists very early on recognised that to have such apparent phenomena in total darkness was a waste of time, and hardly gave credibility to the phenomena they proclaimed proved survival over death. Spiritualists in the past wanted light in their séance rooms, and they wanted sceptics and other non-believers to see what was occurring in the séance room so that they too would be convinced of the reality of spirit.

Not only light, but even going so far as to introduce photography, complete with its flash of blinding light, into the séance room in order to try and capture an image of the spirits that were materialising. Again, there are many examples of this, and dare I say it, none of the mediums suffered the least harm to themselves or their mediumship in the process.

In the 1900s photography was still in its infancy, and the methods used were crude in contrast to what is possible today. We now have modern technology that could be used without any of the potential discomfort or distress occasioned in the past by the sudden flashes of light, and that technology is infrared photography, and thermography. I do not believe, based on the scientific evidence available, that any genuine physical medium has anything whatsoever to fear from appropriate use of infrared photography or thermography.

In saying that, I am not suggesting that Scott Milligan, in refusing to work under conditions where infrared might be used is therefore not a genuine physical medium. Nor do I want to denigrate his belief in his “guidance.” But, as Sue Farrow herself observed, when questioning the validity of the spirit guidance received by the AFC in determining the future of physical mediumship at the College, “we know, a medium is a human instrument and his or her mind (and therefore personal opinions) can never be 100 per cent absent from the communication, even when in deep trance.”

Are we, therefore, going to fall into the trap of saying that whilst the AFC spirit guidance may have been flawed in some way, the spirit guidance of physical mediums will not be. Should we be accepting that the “guidance” received by a physical medium will always be 100 per cent correct and unadulterated by the personal opinions of the medium, but spirit guidance through all other forms of mediumship will be? To me, that is a very dangerous view to take.

I am sure that Scott Milligan is sincere in his belief that it is his spirit guidance that has advised against the use of modern technology, and that the decision he has made to withdraw when confronted with the AFCs new protocols was not an easy one, and no doubt he feels disappointed in the approach the College has decided upon. But how certain can he be that the guidance he received is 100 per cent accurate and uninfluenced by his own perceptions, when he, like so many other physical mediums of today talk repeatedly about the “sensitivity of ectoplasm,” and the potential “dangers” of light.

It is a liturgy used over and over again in public séances to convey to the sitters the risks that the medium is taking by sitting; it is a liturgy that ensures that no one can see what is happening in the séance room; it is a liturgy that is based on a theory about how physical phenomena and materialisation occurs. It is a theory introduced into the ‘folklore’ of physical mediumship long after materialisation phenomena first occurred. And, it is too readily used by physical mediums of today as a way to justify their refusal to work in the light as the pioneers of physical mediumship did in the past.

While undoubtedly there is a need for care in the experimentation with new technology, I am of the view that there is far too much unnecessary, and unjustified fear about the risks involved. This is especially the case when we look at infrared or thermography. These modern technologies simply do not emit any “vibration,” that could cause harm to the medium.

I agree with David Bruton when he stated that Scott Milligan’s withdrawal from involvement with the AFC is “a lost opportunity which could only further the cause of physical mediumship." Scott was being offered the opportunity of a lifetime; the chance to be the first physical medium to prove beyond all reasonable doubt his mediumship was genuine, and in doing so prove to the whole world that what Spiritualism propounds is true!

The physical and materialisation mediums of the past would not have hesitated; they would not have turned their back on the possibility of bringing the truth of Spiritualism to the world. Over and over again, those mediums placed their trust in spirit and agreed to undergo any restraints, any tests and any experiments that might help to prove the reality of Spirit. They did so when they had no way of knowing whether such experiments would work, or be dangerous to their mediumship or health. And they did it gladly.

As for the question posed by the Psychic news article – does the introduction of these protocols herald “the death of physical mediumship as we know it?” In one respect, perhaps it does, and perhaps that really is a very good thing. For when we bring physical mediumship “back into the light” we just might begin to eliminate the fraud, and highlight the genuine, and in so doing really confirm the message of Spiritualism.

Of course, in another respect, sadly the AFC protocols are unlikely to have any significant impact on the physical phenomena scene beyond the walls of the Arthur Findlay College and its outreach centre in Stafford. Given the majority of current physical mediums operate largely or exclusively outside of the authority or control of the AFC or the SNU, in reality the ‘dark séance’ approach is likely to continue unabated, and while those mediums may talk again and again that at some future but unspecified time they plan to introduce light into their séance performances, the chances are that will never happen.

It won’t happen because they will continue to say that to do so is too dangerous and their spirit guidance forbids it. And, in the position they take they will, no doubt inadvertently, allow the fraudulent to continue to operate, and ultimately, even if they are genuine, will fail to achieve what they claim they aim to. They will never prove in the darkness that Spirit Return is for real.