1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

related matters

Discussion in 'ITC & electronic communication' started by mac, Jun 1, 2016.

  1. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    After I woke this morning I lay in bed briefly thinking about my approach to the matters we've discussed concerning trans-dimensional communication.

    A couple of times recently I've written something like “Surely I'm not the only one asking this question?” but as I thought about it I also thought “Well maybe I am!” I'm certainly often the only contributor actually expressing such questions so maybe others aren't thinking about what's been said, not asking themselves if it sounds reasonable?

    When I went online as I made the first cup of tea of the day I headed for ALF to see who'd said what while I was asleep. Only you, Andrew, had said anything overnight and as I read your words I was a little upset at your reference to my skepticism. Upset because I always feel that 'scepticism' can have the connotation of disbelief and, by association, disbelief in what another individual has said. A quick Google search confirmed that usage. But that's not me.

    There was also an alternative definition, one that I hope reflects my own approach namely a “...questioning attitude towards unempirical knowledge or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere.” If I ever just ask 'why?' it's not that I'm disrespecting what others say, not disbelieving what they claim, but simply questioning anything asserted without proper support or inviting challenge. As I thought further I realized I'd been in a similar position before and for a similar reason– that of communication.

    Now in my last years of this incarnation I'm not as mistrusting of others as I used to be in my young, reactionary years. I view them to be as honest as I try to be myself until they let me down. That approach can come unstuck but still I persevere. I recall well ( perhaps not that well!) how impressed I was by the approach of the group whose activities were later to be known as The Scole Experiment, how thorough and honest in their endeavors they appeared. In those days there was much that was experimental, much that couldn't be explained, much that appeared novel. I was happy to be patient and wait for the group to achieve their goals and for explanations to follow later. Does any of this sound familiar?

    The upshot, though, was that the things I waited patiently for did not happen. The trust I had placed in those workers for spirit seemed misplaced. To be fair perhaps they were misled or maybe they were so eager to be on the cusp of something revolutionary that they failed to keep their feet on the ground? The work they were doing promised to reliably deliver the message of survival but in all the excitement the work might not have been approached as thoroughly as it deserved to be.

    Perhaps all this is why the curmudgeonly 'mac' already sees holes in the promised rich tapestry?
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2016
  2. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    I'm sorry to offend, Mac--I did, in fact, mean "skepticism" as the term is reflected in the emboldened definition above. Moreover, I believe that a certain amount of skepticism is both healthy and necessary when discussing and investigating matters such as these. This is especially the case since the dead are not speaking to us "loud and clear" at the moment, so to speak. So, please understand that my comment was not intended as a critique of your questions at all. :)

    I do see what you mean. Unfortunately, there is not very much that I can do for the time being to get you the information you desire. Perhaps though, you might try connecting to the North American Station yourself? Craig has published detailed instructions on the Afterlife Research and Education Institute's website. Just be sure to email him--his address is on that page as well--so that he knows you are working with the Station, and so that he can send you any additional directions. It can apparently take a while for the Station to start communicating, but I actually got responses on my first try, so one never knows.
  3. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Hi Andrew

    I wasn't in any way offended by your using the word 'skeptical' - we know one another too well for that ever to happen. :) No I was upset at being thought sceptical in the sense of the 'wrong' definition, the first one I outlined. I am very comfortable being sceptical for the reasons in the second definition; that's definitely the right one to describe my approach.

    My comments weren't meant to put any pressure on you, Andrew. They were simply observations about why I am the way I am. I hope I'm not seen as awkward just for the sake of being awkward. My wife has often chided me for wanting to explain - at length! - points I feel strongly about. But that's me, that's how I am.

    I don't expect anyone to provide proof - evidence - for me. I may sometimes ask for a favor, for help, but I'm not expecting you, Andrew, or anyone else for that matter to provide me with information. I'll base my judgment on what I hear, what I read. All I'm hoping for are indicators that pass the level of persuasion I find necessary for me. Others are, naturally, perfectly entitled to accept whatever level of persuasion is right for them. I don't seek to influence them.

    I'll give some thought to your suggestion about trying to connect to the North American Station. It might be an interesting exercise for me and might also help others in some way. The latter is way more important to me than the former.

    Last edited: Jun 1, 2016
  4. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Thanks for your reply, Mac. I understand precisely what you are saying, and I do hope you find the explanations and the evidence you are looking for! :)
  5. Wait & see

    Hi Mac & Andrew
    Thank you for the questions and dialogue! I tend to be silent on things I don't have a fairly clear understanding or strong opinion. At this point I don't have enough understanding to even ask preliminary questions! With the communication stations I have a strong hope and a wait and see opinion. My belief is that answers will come as progress on the station is made...so I lurk in the background and read postings from others who know much more than I. So, thank you again for keeping us all up dated Andrew, and for asking your questions Mac!
  6. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    It's my pleasure and I hope I ask questions about which you and other members will enjoy hearing answers.

    I often hope that my questioning doesn't simply come over as needlessly negative. I don't think it is. Relevant questions - anyone's relevant questions about anything - deserve answers in my view. They challenge complacency, challenge unquestioning acceptance.

    I'm 69 and by now I have enough knowledge to know some of the things that I don't know. And of course there are things that I don't know that I don't know! But I'll probably find them out as I go along - eventually.

    When I ask questions I want to understand, I want to know if something is worth heeding. If I learn something then others may also learn what I've learned and that may them too. I hope that's what happens.
  7. ShingingLight1967

    ShingingLight1967 Active Member

    mac.. you are not the only one to ask such questions. I too, have so many questions and am looking for concrete evidental answers, but dont understand the topic well enough to ask indepth questions as you do... so the conversations really help me. You ask the probing questions. The words that I just dont have or know how to formulate. I thank you for that.
  8. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Thank you, too, for your kind words, SL.

    What we are hearing is that a mechanism has been developed that goes a step beyond EVP - the electronic voice phenomenon - inasmuch as there's the unique element of choosing who the communicator will be. That's very much different from the old understanding where mediums can not 'summon the dead' but rather they come because they choose to do so. And with ITC we appear to have the situation that not only can a specific discarnate be 'found' it happens exceedingly quickly, almost instantaneously. It also appears that the individual summoned always 'comes to the phone' - the communication device - and quickly learns how to use it.

    We don't know if the situation ever arises that a chosen discarnate either can't be - or doesn't want to be - located or chooses not to be involved. But perhaps the so-called dead always want to communicate with loved ones if there is an opportunity? If that's so we could conceivably 'call' anyone with whom we've had a close relationship and who we'd expect to want to speak to us. I will be following developments with great interest with the very real possibility I'll have to eat a generous serving of humble pie! And that's OK because for three decades I've declared my wish that many more folk could hear and accept the message of survival.

    Being able to reliably speak to loved ones, and hearing their replies clearly, would be the perfect way.
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2016
  9. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    I think the emboldened statement is worded a tad bit ambiguously; I don't believe the discarnate person is "found." Personally, I think the more likely scenario is that his or her awareness of the on-going communication session is triggered by the earthly communicator's request, be it vocal or telepathic, for that person's presence. At that point, the spirit then travels to the appropriate Station and begins communicating.

    This has never happened to me when I've attempted to contact a loved one whom I knew on earth. I've also had success contacting a family member whom I never knew, but I do not yet know whether the familiar bond between us was a factor in her decision to communicate. In any case, I do not think this in any way goes against the idea that spirits cannot be summoned by the living--it's more likely that at this early stage in the Station's development, the dead are especially eager to drop everything and confirm their survival to their earthly loved ones.

    However, in one session I did attempt to contact a man whom I had never met, and I did not receive a response. I later recorded the man's earthly daughter asking the same questions that I had asked, and a response was present that time. Thus, I do believe that the dead are more likely to communicate to their own loved ones than to any old person on earth. (It may also be the case that a total stranger's vocal request for his or her presence at the Station does not alert them in the same way that a loved one's request would.)
  10. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    fair comment, Andrew - It looks to be the case, then, that it's an awareness of the station experimenters' aims - and a willingness to co-operate - that prepares communicators for contact. Would that be accurate?

    It appears, then, that mental preparedness and willingness is still needed for successful communication, much as with mediumship.
  11. ShingingLight1967

    ShingingLight1967 Active Member

    This could be considered a huge development if this actually concrete evidence of those that have passed over are communicating with us. But I still need to understand.... (I guess more reading is in my future) I just have so many questions, and everytime I read more it generates more questions.

    I guess I dont really understand how this different than the classic EVPs that we all know? How is it that we arent just "hearing" what we want to hear? Isnt that always the critism that comes into play with EVPs? So, why is this different?

    Do they have to use the "gibberish" or is there a way it can be more "organic"? I listened to the Brazilian Station of the little girl and the quality was so clear, it made me skeptical that it was actually true. It was too good if that makes sense. Is that the direction that the North American Station is headed? Will we be able to, very clearly, know without a doubt hear and know that we are speaking with our loved ones? How is it that the Brazilian station's recordings are so clear?

    It seems to me that this protocol is just a bigger version of an echovox app that I can get on my phone.. so why cant I just use that if I am so inclined? That, to me would be the way to make this accessable to everyone. So, what is the difference?

    As I type these questions out.. I see just how much of a novice I am when it comes to this subject and how this must frustrate the ones that have been working in this field for a while. I also see how I am lookin for answers NOW and concrete evidence NOW because I long to be able to have conversations with my husband like we used to do.
  12. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Hi SL,

    Thanks for posting your questions--I'm sure they've also occurred to many others reading these posts! Craig Hogan is really our resident expert when it comes to ITC, but he is very busy and does not post often, so I'm going to offer my thoughts in the meantime. :)

    First, allow me to clarify a couple of terms. What we are doing is a special type of instrumental transcommunication (ITC), which is loosely defined as any attempt to record either audio or visual messages from discarnate entities with electronic equipment. Therefore, based on my understanding, "audio ITC" is a sort of electronic voice phenomenon--the two terms are more or less interchangeable for our purposes. However, we are communicating directly with the so-called "stations" that the dead have constructed on their plane of existence, which is why our work is often referred to as "ITC with Stations."

    With traditional EVP, spirits must come to the earthbound realm to communicate through the recording equipment. This approach is problematic because that plane of existence is also inhabited by all manner of negative beings who would be only too happy to toy with the living. That is why many EVP messages often create more confusion than clarity; the messages often include impatience, hyperbole, and grandstanding--sure signs that they're from low-level entities.

    ITC with Stations allows us to contact those in the Summerland (and those above that level) without interference or impersonations by mischievous beings in the earthbound realm. The dead, we are told, have constructed at least three solid buildings, which they call "stations," for the purpose of communication with those on earth. They say that these buildings exist on a "distant" plane, meaning an area that negative entities could not access without help from more advanced beings. In my sessions, I have been told that they use computer-like machines to communicate with us. They communicate their thoughts into the machine telepathically, and it then converts them into audible words, which are impressed on our recording equipment. (The dead do not have internal organs such as vocal cords, and they communicate almost exclusively by thought, so this seems to be the easiest way to make their voices heard, so to speak, for those on earth who are not clairaudient.) The English-speaking Station is called the North American Station, which is being modeled after the Brazilian Station. We are a couple of years behind the Brazilian Station in terms of technological development.

    The dead can, as you might expect, understand any language. But since they communicate telepathically without words, they need to build up lexicons in each individual language for their machines to use, which is why there are different stations for different languages right now. The stations have geographic names, but as Mac has pointed out, these are really misnomers. Anyone who speaks Brazilian Portuguese can use the Brazilian Station, just as anyone who speaks English can use the North American Station.

    So, the difference between our research and traditional ITC is mainly the question of with whom we are communicating, as well as the eventual purpose of the work, I suppose. The traditional method is a sort of pot luck, where one can hear from loved ones, but also from any spirit that's attracted to the experimenter; the new method ensures that only loving, successfully-transitioned entities can communicate, and it also has the long-term goal of clear, telephone-like conversations. Personally, I don't care for traditional ITC/EVP at all; there's something rather ominous about it, and it is not something I would ever try myself--but I have felt nothing but love and reassurance when working with the North American Station.

    The question of whether we are merely hearing what we want to hear was a big issue for me when I first began. However, I have since found that I can hear most of the responses even when I am unsure what to listen for. For example, this past week I helped a woman reconnect with her father via the North American Station. She asked several evidentiary questions--none of which could be answered with common words such as months or days--and I analyzed the recording afterwards to find the answers for her. I could not hear responses for two questions, but I did hear the correct responses for the rest of them, despite the fact that I had never met this man in my life.

    Additionally, I find that the answers I hear are not always what I'm expecting to hear. I also don't try to "make things fit." In most sessions, there is at least one question that doesn't receive a response. Maybe the response is there, but if it is too faint to be sure, I consider the question to be unanswered and make a note to ask it again in a future session.

    Right now, the signal is still somewhat weak for the North American Station, so we do have to use the gibberish for the time being. The Brazilian researchers, however, are beginning to communicate without gibberish. I unsuccessfully attempted to contact the Brazilian Station this past week, and the protocol is somewhat different. To contact a specific discarnate researcher named Marlene, Craig had me use a recording of her earthly voice. The idea was that she would be able to impress her responses underneath the recording. I did not receive an audible response, but I am told those at the Brazilian Station have done this before, so most likely I did something wrong in the process.

    The communication quality will certain get much clearer; we have been told that the responses will be very clear by December/January. That being said, whether or not we will be able to hear our loved ones voices is unclear to me. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but I'm not sure how they would do it. With people like Marlene, who have left behind recordings of their earthly voices, it is possible to use those recordings to synthetically reproduce the person's voice; I'm unsure of whether or not the dead would have any of doing it from their end though, which would likely be the only solution for those who did not think to record their voices before moving on. I do know that Dr. Gary Schwartz of the University of Arizona is working on what is known as the "soul phone," which is a similar project. The approach is different, but the aim is also telephone-like communications between the living and the dead. So, it is possible that his approach will eventually allow for a solution to this problem.

    However, the Brazilian Station is also working on sending photographs to the earth plane, and I believe that the North American Station will eventually head in that direction as well. So, even if a person's original voice cannot be reproduced, photos, and perhaps even videos in the future, should help to determine the validity of the connection.

    I'm unaware of the app, but this process is very simple. All you need is something that will play the gibberish file and something that will record what is being played, as well as your voice. Since you need two devices--one to play and one to record--I can't picture how one would do it with only a phone. Personally, I've just invested in a microphone specifically for this, but I have been using my iPhone to record and iTunes on my MacBook to play the gibberish, and I have had very satisfactory results.

    These are good questions, SL--and I hope that my answers will help not only you but many of our lurkers who likely have these same thoughts! I will say, however, that the best proof of a phenomenon's validity is often personal experience. If it feels right to you, I would suggest that you try to connect to the North American Station in order to contact your husband. You can find Craig Hogan's contact information here. Just email him and ask to join the research project. He will send you the instructions and the gibberish files you need.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 11, 2016
  13. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Hi Andrew

    Why do you think it is that signal strength or reception is so much weaker working through the new, English language station than through the early Portugese language one?

    Is it down to the need to first create the lexicon of English-language words in the memory of the thought/speech transformer device - effectively a working database of words - before close-attunement of discarnate and incarnate can take place, do you think?

    In mediumship it's often taught that the medium is helped by hearing the voice of the recipient, even if (s)he can't indentify with what's being given. Perhaps 'voice attunement' of the device or transformer and the communicator is first needed as with Siri, Cortana and other speech-processors. Has this ever been suggested by the reseachers?

    Is there still always a period of 'attunement' when new parents and children using the Portugese language station begin communicating, albeit perhaps a shorter one due to the strong love connection?
  14. Nirvana

    Nirvana Active Member

    Photographs of the Summerland?!?
  15. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Hi Mac,

    I think a big factor concerning the limitations of the North American Station is certainly the size of the English-language lexicon that they are building. Based my understanding of the Stations though, I don't think that this would affect the strength of the signal itself; rather, I suspect that the small size of the lexicon is represented by the shortness of the responses we are receiving. When the lexicon is decently large--I'm not sure when that will be, or how many words are needed for a workable lexicon--then we will likely be able to receive entire sentences, like the "Mommy, I can talk now!" and the "Ready at this point." messages received by Sonia Rinaldi through the Brazilian Station, rather than just a couple of words.

    However, I think the signal is weak for another reason. As Roberta said in another thread a couple of weeks ago, this sort of communication is somewhat akin to communicating back and forth between a low-frequency television channel and a much higher one. It takes time for the dead to perfect the mechanism that they use to convey their messages to our level of reality, so I tend to believe that the newness of the North American Station is the principal reason for the signal's weakness right now. That is why Craig is encouraging anyone who is interested to begin communicating with the Station--the dead say that the practice helps them hone the signal; it's been likened to laying fiber-optic cables. We expect the responses from the North American Station to be much clearer in about six months or so.

    Another potential factor could be the recording equipment. As I mentioned above, I've been using my iPhone to record and my MacBook's speakers to play the gibberish--it's an imperfect system to be sure, but it has produced satisfactory results. Yesterday, however, I did order some more professional recording equipment to see whether or not that might make a difference in the clarity of the communications I'm receiving. Once I have had a chance to test it all out this week, I'll post my results--I'm a bit behind on analyzing the sessions and making the subtitled videos.
  16. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Yes, indeed! Researchers have actually been working with visual ITC for decades, and some fairly impressive results have allegedly been achieved. The recording process is, as I understand it, fairly simple, and I'd love to experiment with it, but as it is, I'm juggling several afterlife-related projects right now and am behind on my communications with the North American Station.
  17. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    When I made my suggestion it didn't make sense to me but I wanted to be open to consider reasons that wouldn't be logical in our physical dimension but might be in the etheric one(s). But even just the need to upload a simple dictionary's worth of words and grammatical constructions would likely be a significantly difficult task I'd guess.

    In electronic terms it would be impedance mis-match that results in a weak signal or data transfer. The mis-match between the communication frequencies generated by an earth-communicator and the operating frequency range of the transformer/translator device may be the cause. Quite how that will improve with time and use hasn't been explained but neither has the operating system of the device. In mediumship there's an organic component to achieving matching but we're told the device is housed in a building on some kind of table and I can't figure what it is or how it operates but it appears to be inorganic if either of those terms apply 'over there'.

    No matter - the South American device appears to be operating to its design parameters and the North American device would, I'd guess, be of similar construction. Presumably the prediction for an end-of-the-year improvement in the situation is based on experience of it in the Brazilian Station?

    It will be interesting to see how that works out, Andrew.
  18. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Any links to info, please?
  19. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    I'm not sure where I first came across visual ITC, but a quick Google search did provide what appears to be a decent source of information. This webpage, published by the Association of TransCommunication, demonstrates the feedback-loop technique of capturing the images. The pictures offered there are very hazy, but I have seen better ones elsewhere in the past.
  20. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    As always, you bring up good points. We, or at least I, don't have the all the information right now. To be honest, technology has never been an expertise of mine. All I know is that the dead want us to keep communicating with the North American Station, and that they are telling us that our efforts are helping them to improve the quality of their responses.

    I would suggest though, that there is no organic component here, since the purpose of this work seems to be to provide a method communication that does not rely on mediums or those with developed psychic abilities.

Share This Page