(2018-05-30, 05:11 AM)Kamarling Wrote: I seem to remember struggling with Archie Roy's book too. The impression I got was that he considered the CCs to be the ultimate best evidence but I found it hard to follow the trail and ended up confused as to who was dead or alive, who was using pseudonyms and who was collating the material.
That is one criticism I would make of Hamilton's book too. He talks about people by name, giving instructions or information to the people producing the scripts, when what he means is that the people in question were dead, and this is the "pro-psi" interpretation of what was happening. Given that many of the alleged discarnate communicators had themselves been psychical researchers, and some of them died in the course of this decades-long experiment, that can be very confusing.