From Skeptic to Believer: News Anchor Gets a First Time Reading from a Medium

129 Replies, 21412 Views

Here's a case I posted a while back on the Skeptiko forum, that is evidence against telepathy with the living, but not Super-Psi proof (à la Akashic Records). It's my summary of what Arthur Findlay reports in On the Edge of the Etheric (1931). It's the "Eric Saunders" case.

It's 1919, Arthur takes his brother with him to a Direct Voice (trumpet) séance in Glasgow, Scotland. His brother is recently back from the Army (the war) and no one present knows that except for Art, nor where he was stationed (most of the time in Lowestoft, England, and sometimes in a nearby village called Kessingland, training gunners). No one present knows Art’s brother either.

During the séance, a "voice" said to Art's brother: "Eric Saunders". His brother said he didn't know him, but the voice insisted. The brother asked where they had met and the voice said "In the Army". The brother then mentioned different places (cities in England and different countries) but made sure not to mention Lowestoft where he been stationed most of the time (or Kessingland). The voice said: "No, none of these places. I knew you when you were near Lowestoft." Art's brother asked why he said "Near Lowestoft" and the voice replied "You were not in Lowestoft then, but at Kessingland".

The brother then asked what company he was in, B or C, but couldn't discern the answer. He asked the voice if he could remember the name of the company Commander. The voice said "Macnamara". Findlay goes on to report that that was indeed the name of the B Company Commander at the time.

His brother then pretended to know “Eric” (the voice) and said: “Oh yes, you were one of my Lewis gunners, were you not?” The voice replied: “No, you had not the Lewis guns then, it was the Hotchkiss.” This was indeed correct - the Lewis guns had been replaced by the Hotchkiss guns in April 1917.

Other evidential question-and-answer bits followed. Art’s brother still did not remember this man. “Eric” said he’d been killed in France and Art’s brother asked when. He answered that he’d passed away “with the Big Draft in August 1917”. The brother asked why he called it the Big Draft, and he said: “Don’t you remember the Big Draft, when the Colonel came on the parade ground and made a speech?” This referred to an especially large group sent out to France that month, and it was the only time that Art’s brother remembered the Colonel ever personally saying goodbye to the men.

“Eric” then thanked Art’s brother for the gunnery training he had given him, and said it had been most useful to him in France. The brother asked why he’d come through to speak to him, and the voice replied: “Because I have never forgotten that you once did me a good turn”. Findlay goes on to say that his brother had a vague recollection of obtaining leave for one of the gunners, because of special circumstances, but he couldn’t remember the name.

Six months after this incident, Art’s brother was in London and met the Corporal who had been his training assistant at that time. He relayed the story and asked him if he remembered a man called “Eric Saunders”. The Corporal usually got to know the men closer than Art’s brother did, because of the number of men Art’s brother had to train (about a dozen every 2 weeks for 2 years). But the Corporal did not remember any person with that name. However, he had a pocket diary that had a full list of the men under their training. They looked to the records of the B Company and found the words: “Eric Saunders, f.q., August ‘17”, with a red line drawn through them. “F.q” stood for qualified and the red line meant the man had gone away at that time (August 1917).

They couldn’t find any further information, but Findlay writes: “Even allowing for this it is a remarkable case, as it is fraud proof, telepathy proof and cryptaesthesia proof”. He goes on to add that the case contained 14 separate facts, and each one was correct.
(2017-08-24, 10:54 PM)Chris Wrote: Along the same lines, I know there's a fairly recent biography of Leonora Piper by Michael Tymn. Has anyone here read it, and if so would they recommend it? Or would anyone recommend anything else that's been written about her, including sceptical accounts?

Joseph Rinn's book Searchlight on Psychical Research, 1950  contains skeptical information on Piper. He put her mediumship down to cold reading and muscle reading. After a negative sitting he attended where Piper was obviously fishing for information, he was banned from attending any further séances. A spiritualist commentator later made the allegation that Rinn never attended any séances with Piper and he made the whole thing up to discredit her... I find this unlikely.

There are 64 pages free of Rinn's book here: https://issuu.com/conjuringarts/docs/pag..._psychical
(2017-08-27, 05:40 PM)Chris Wrote: I think it's logically impossible to prove survival, because if information is to be verifiable, the information needed to verify it has to be known by someone or has to be stored somewhere. If telepathy and clairvoyance exist, that means it is accessible through psi.

Sorry, I don't buy this argument.

To take a small example, one of the videos I posted in the reincarnation thread has someone finding a number of correlations with memories retrieved through hypnotic regression. There was a particular pattern of markings hidden beneath the dust and dirt on the stone floor in some obscure outbuilding of an old stone cottage or something like that. The very obscurity of the detail raises the question of why it would feature so strongly - why not something more prominent instead?

There are other examples where the information had to be dug up from ancient records which were unpublished in modern times.

The super-psi argument simply causes more difficulties than it solves. For example, why would someone come up with obscure and unknown details relating to one single person? If super-psi is operating, why wouldn't it pick up information from hundreds or millions of different people?

More to the point, reincarnation recall isn't about dry academic facts such as words on a page. It is a holistic  phenomenon, including everything that it means to be a person, from emotional states, likes and dislikes, attitudes and opinions towards the world. Those are the things which form the nature of what one is in everyday life, not just in a brief interlude of recall, but continuously throughout a lifetime.

The only realistic alternative to reincarnation would be a form of possession, but that too would imply survival.
[-] The following 2 users Like Typoz's post:
  • tim, Ninshub
(2017-08-27, 06:55 PM)Typoz Wrote: The only realistic alternative to reincarnation would be a form of possession, but that too would imply survival.

But why not a form of retrocognitive telepathy? If you accept telepathy and precognition, why shouldn't the transfer of information between two minds at different times be possible?
(2017-08-27, 06:30 PM)Leuders Wrote: Joseph Rinn's book Searchlight on Psychical Research, 1950  contains skeptical information on Piper. He put her mediumship down to cold reading and muscle reading. After a negative sitting he attended where Piper was obviously fishing for information, he was banned from attending any further séances. A spiritualist commentator later made the allegation that Rinn never attended any séances with Piper and he made the whole thing up to discredit her... I find this unlikely.

There are 64 pages free of Rinn's book here: https://issuu.com/conjuringarts/docs/pag..._psychical

Thanks for that. Though attending a single seance at which a medium fished for information seems to be a rather slender basis for reaching a judgment about her whole career, doesn't it?
[-] The following 1 user Likes Guest's post:
  • Ninshub
(2017-08-27, 07:11 PM)Chris Wrote: Thanks for that. Though attending a single seance at which a medium fished for information seems to be a rather slender basis for reaching a judgment about her whole career, doesn't it?

Yes a single sitting in itself will not reveal her entire career results. But these single sittings all add up and they are usually ignored by paranormal believers for example Michael E. Tymn's biography does not mention any of the negative sittings (Rinn is not cited etc). In total I have come across about sixty sitters who received totally negative sittings with Piper, noting she fished for information or made errors.

Amy Tanner lists some of these sitters in her book:

https://archive.org/stream/studiesinspir...2/mode/2up

(The chapter first cites sitters who were convinced, some neutral and then those who had negative sittings)
(This post was last modified: 2017-08-27, 07:32 PM by Fake Leuders.)
(2017-08-27, 07:31 PM)Leuders Wrote: Yes a single sitting in itself will not reveal her entire career results. But these single sittings all add up and they are usually ignored by paranormal believers for example Michael E. Tymn's biography does not mention any of the negative sittings (Rinn is not cited etc). In total I have come across about sixty sitters who received totally negative sittings with Piper, noting she fished for information or made errors.

Amy Tanner lists some of these sitters in her book:

https://archive.org/stream/studiesinspir...2/mode/2up

(The chapter first cites sitters who were convinced, some neutral and then those who had negative sittings)

Based on the information on Greg Taylor's account, Amy Tanner isn't a reliable source.
http://www.dailygrail.com/essays/2010/11...al-skeptic
[-] The following 1 user Likes Guest's post:
  • Roberta
(2017-08-27, 07:31 PM)Leuders Wrote: Michael E. Tymn's biography does not mention any of the negative sittings (Rinn is not cited etc).

To be fair to Tymn, he makes it explicit at the outset that his intention is not to study the "strike outs", but the "game-winning hits" (p. xvi-xvii). He also says his book is not a biography of Piper but a study of the "dynamics of her mediumship". (p. xvi).
[-] The following 2 users Like Ninshub's post:
  • Roberta, tim
(2017-08-27, 07:37 PM)Chris Wrote: Based on the information on Greg Taylor's account, Amy Tanner isn't a reliable source.
http://www.dailygrail.com/essays/2010/11...al-skeptic

I see the full text of Mrs Sidgwick's review of Amy Tanner's book is available at the Internet Archive:
https://archive.org/stream/NotesonSpirit...0/mode/2up
[-] The following 1 user Likes Guest's post:
  • Ninshub
(2017-08-27, 07:56 PM)Chris Wrote: I see the full text of Mrs Sidgwick's review of Amy Tanner's book is available at the Internet Archive:
https://archive.org/stream/NotesonSpirit...0/mode/2up

And also a similarly critical review of Rinn's book by W. H. Salter of the SPR:
https://archive.org/stream/NotesonSpirit...0/mode/2up
[-] The following 3 users Like Guest's post:
  • Roberta, tim, Ninshub

  • View a Printable Version


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)