 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Dec 31st, 2006 |
| Location: | Clearwater, Florida USA |
| Posts: | 1637 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
I would like to share some comments regarding your conversation.
Fortunately, I have never experienced negative or hostile comments in my recordings or experiments, or at least not anything that I would recognize as such.
Unfortunately, I haven't really had the opportunity yet to be concerned with whom I am speaking to or recording with, so I haven't had to deal with the issue of discerning true identities of spirit communicators. Rather than talk to them, I mostly know them by their faces in the pictures I receive. Judging from my research and the experiences of others, this is definitely an area of concern.
I would agree that evidence of sustained communications is somewhat scarce, but perhaps also owing to the nature of the rare ability of physical mediumship. Currently, I view the events of The Circle of the Silver Chord as momentous. I would much rather there be fewer instances of these events with mountains of evidence rather than multiple instances with little to no evidence.
I would definitely wholeheartedly agree with you that the most prolific evidence in anyone's mind is when they receive a message from a family member in spirit which could not have been known by any person present in physical form. Hands down, I see this as the most astounding and powerful evidence. The question is: does everyone in the world have to experience this before they believe? Perhaps.
It seems that most information given to us is meant to give us a glimpse of what it's like on the other side. At the same time, it also seems that much information is withheld for our best interests. Still, I'm not aware of any obvious discrepancies which could not be construed as simply areas of which we have no current knowledge. Perhaps we could discuss them.
While it is true that much of the information received in the early 90's definitely passes the "boggle point", I sense that an effort is currently underway (by the spirit side) to bring this information to a more digestible level for the common man - something which they can understand, something which they can relate to. I feel that in the near future there will be a wildfire of unexplained events, instances of spirit communication.
3 of the best examples I can think of regarding direct messages from loved ones in spirit would be:
Sonia Rinaldi in Brazil (A.N.T.) and the telephone conversations in which parents speak with their deceased children.
Marcello Bacci in Italy - conversations over radio between people and their loved ones, held regularly, an event which has been occurring for many many years.
John Edward in the U.S. - a psychic medium who is making quite an impact across the world by giving unique distinct messages to people from their loved ones on the other side. Though the word "psychic medium" raises eyebrows, John has been tested many times for authenticity and is touching millions. The evidence will be obvious mostly in the hearts of the people receiving the messages.
I've spent the last year trying to figure out the answer to this simple question - Why haven't people heard about evidence of life after death? It's been piling up for over 100 years. It seems some evidence has never made it to the public, and the majority of it that does is still only usually found when people who search for it. For example, did you know Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (author of Sherlock Holmes books) researched life after death and wrote books about it? Not only that, but you can read them for free online, verbatim messages from the other side and much more. Now, if I see a special on him on the Discovery channel, will they mention this? No. So why am I surprised every time I find something new?
In my view, the problem isn't a lack of evidence.....it's a lack of cooperative efforts & framework to link all the evidence together in a presentable form which is easy for the public to be aware of. The media doesn't help either. Perhaps the problem here is that people still consider evidence of life after death to be subjective, based on the opinions of the individual. As such, there is no organized structure around which this information is bound together. Sounds like a catch-22.
Will talk soon,
Keith
ITC Bridge