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.

related matters

Discussion in 'After-Death Communication' started by mac, Jun 1, 2016.

  1. mac

    mac 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 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. lybg

    lybg New Member

    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 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 New 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 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 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.

Share This Page