1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. AfterLifeForums is a resource for those seeking information about survival and the afterlife dimensions.
Dismiss Notice
To get the most from this website please register for an account.


Discussion in 'After-Death Communication' started by cleodoggie, May 28, 2012.

  1. A very valid point! I have always wondered about this too, guess it's one of those mysteries that hopefully, one day, we'll find out....guess when in the afterlife though..
  2. Skye

    Skye New Member

    It's funny how language works. If I saw a ghost, it wouldn't confirm my belief of an afterlife, it would merely suggest the presence of residual energy. Whereas, if I saw a spirit, this would provide confirmation of an afterlife.
  3. What's up, Skye?

    Interesting that you should bring that up.

    I'm not that experienced when it comes to these matters. If I saw either one, I probably wouldn't know the difference right away unless I did more research into it or asked an expert about it.

    But yeah, a ghost would be good enough for me, especially considering I don't get all the cool experiences that a lot of people on this forum get.
  4. Skye

    Skye New Member

    Nothing up but the sky WWE. :)

    My perception of a ghost is it's akin to watching the television. In so much as it's the residual energy of a person repeating the same scene over and over and they are unaware of your presence and they can't speak to you. It doesn't necessarily mean the person is 'dead'.

    Whereas a spirit being can communicate with you via a 2 way mind to mind link and they are aware of your presence.

    If ghost is good enough for you then there's nothing wrong with that. A number of people prefer to say ghost rather than spirit, a debate over which is which could ensue for ages as there will always be a difference in opinion.
  5. Good stuff.

    I've never seen a ghost, but I know someone who has. It was in her old house, and this ghost always repeated the same scene as you describe (a small child who would periodically appear and cry for his mother).

    But eventually, the earthbounds get rescued, or at least that's what I hear. And wind up in the Summerland.

    So the sooner I get rescued, the sooner I can have another beer and poutine if I want it, provided I get stuck.
  6. Skye

    Skye New Member

    My experience is such that 'earthbounds' aren't actually earthbound. They are spirits that have crossed over but have chosen to stay on the astral plane (a part of the spirit world) rather than continue to the spirit world. Again people's opinions will differ with this.
  7. Agree on the first point, agree on the second as well, proof is a little beyond us at this stage. A coincidence being 2 or more random events or accidents occuring with some connection would suggest it is the connection that can't be proved, as you have clearly stated before. The individual events or accidents in themselves can be easily proved as to their causes, but the connection is the missing link. Either there is a reasonable and logical cause for the connection that is simply beyond the comprehension or perception of the observer, or there is another intervening element causing the connection to occur, maybe that's where the Spirit Influence comes in. But as you rightly said, that cannot be proved in each instance.
  8. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    We cannot prove it either way, but Mikey can. Carol & Mikey have said several times that there is no such thing as coincidence, when it comes to after-death communication. I think that Mikey would not mislead people, if this were not indeed in the case. And besides, he's in a much better position to know than any of us are.
  9. mac

    mac Staff Member

    I have no concerns that he would mislead us but simply because Mikey is a discarnate doesn't mean he's infallible or omniscient and we have already agreed that in matters of transdimensional communication the issue of coincidence likely doesn't occur.

    My quoted posting was in respect of other matters and what I wrote "But as for the other, we can't prove that coincidence is sometimes/often just chance and you can't prove it isn't!" applies to Mikey too. Just declaring that something is the case isn't proof, be that from a discarnate or incarnate alike.

    And in general, to get the etheric perspective, it's vitally important to ask a question in the correct way to stand the best chance of getting the correct answer. Even then the question has to be communicated in the correct way and ideally the recipient needs to know why the question has been asked. That allows for the right emphasis and weight in the reply. (That applies equally to our own dimension!) Finally the response needs to be transmitted as accurately as possible.

    Such communications have always been a fraught process.
  10. mac

    mac Staff Member

    Without a proven connection, events are simply coincident occurrences.....

Share This Page