Mod+ Development Circle for Mediumship

#1
I sat(participated) regularly for many years in a development circle at the local Psychic centre.
This was for the unfoldment of mediumship.

I realise how difficult it is to receive a message , but I also realise how genuine it is .
after all, if you can get things yourself, you know it is not humbug, and that others can do the same.

Unfortunately most of the 'mediumship' we see nowadays is more 'psychic' information, which is relatively easier. Additionally, it is of such a poor standard (generally) that it's little wonder skeptics have a field day with it.

I know some of the forum members will know exactly what I mean.

An example of what I could receive , but only very occasionally :

Essentially I have to get into that quiet state , then a word would appear on my mind, but with that word came a feeling that it was right, and not from my own cogitations.
I would get a few more words after this. I would not try to connect them but would give them to the receiver who would understand them perfectly, and put them together. I asked no questions whatsoever to the receiver , and I also knew who in particular the message was for, just before it would arrive.

More skilled people could get more, and receive the words quicker, and put them in a sentence. but I was not that gifted.

We can all do this - to varying degrees . Just like everything else , if we apply ourselves.
 
#2
Last edited:
#3
I sat(participated) regularly for many years in a development circle at the local Psychic centre. This was for the unfoldment of mediumship.

I realise how difficult it is to receive a message , but I also realise how genuine it is .
after all, if you can get things yourself, you know it is not humbug, and that others can do the same.
Maybe so. Everyone is psychic to some degree is an unprovable hypothesis but I'm not willing to argue the point as long as you're not selling anything. :D

Unfortunately most of the 'mediumship' we see nowadays is more 'psychic' information, which is relatively easier. Additionally, it is of such a poor standard (generally) that it's little wonder skeptics have a field day with it.
I've been to more medium's than I can count. :( When you go to Lily Dale they call themselves psychic mediums, many of them, I guess that covers all the psi basis <shrug>.

An example of what I could receive , but only very occasionally :

Essentially I have to get into that quiet state , then a word would appear on my mind, but with that word came a feeling that it was right, and not from my own cogitations.
I would get a few more words after this. I would not try to connect them but would give them to the receiver who would understand them perfectly, and put them together. I asked no questions whatsoever to the receiver , and I also knew who in particular the message was for, just before it would arrive.

More skilled people could get more, and receive the words quicker, and put them in a sentence. but I was not that gifted.
Just the other day I was sitting with a person who channels angels. She kinda does the same thing. I don't know about your gift but she was handing out maxims, advice and such to 30 people in this room. I know this woman personally and have sat in tranclesss direct voice seance with her many times. Still do.

Here's the problem as I see it. What information that could not be possibly known to the medium is passed through the medium from the other side to sitters? Stuff that only the sitter could verify.

All of the remainder is subjective as to its value and that includes Silver "Big Jump" Birch, Chlorine, Darryl Anka and Bashar and yahoos like Luv and Liter Jamie who channels potty mouthed Erik whomever

http://withloveandlight.com/channeling-erik/jamie-works-with-channeling-erik/#

and Pendulum Carol and her self-admitted Sixth Realm (one level short of God) 'discarnate' son Mikey aka Carol and Mikey.


http://afterlifeforums.com/showthre...municating&s=666fa6c8bdff00cf10fff66d65e6ff12

Entertaining? You betcha. Mediumship? Iffy. :eek:
 
Last edited:
#4
Mediums are fake, mate, they have duped people for years.
Sure have and they appear to be on the upswing. I expect more are coming as employment levels drop. lol

Dear Esquire, have you ever held ectoplasmic-coated spirits in your hands, felt their pulse, heard them breath or listened to the sounds of their beating hearts?

Me either. ;)

I have had evidence given to me about one of my parents (dead for over a half-century) that only my father, mother and I could possibly know. I had to look it up in a family genealogy book...that I wasn't aware that existed. :eek: The medium, paid in cash, thought my name was Rufus Reardon.

"A fake $20 bill does not make every $20 bill fake".~ Tyler Snotgern, 21Nov2013 0900 hrs.
 
#6
@Mazda - you disliked my two posts above. Why so?
It is very difficult to ascertain whether you are suggesting that mediumship is all fake smoke and mirrors, or something else.

In very plain terms, what are you saying about mediumship?

Also, what did you mean by the medium thought your name was rufus reardon? She/he was way off? You mean your name really is Tyler Snotgern? :(
 
Last edited:
#7
This sub-forum is for discussing "doing" (as the OP did) - please take your naysaying, "intellectualizing", etc to another section of the forum.
 
#8
Thanks Mazda. Sorry that you got slammed by the types of posting not appropriate to this sub-forum. I may ask for mod privileges just for this sub-forum so people can have a "safe" place to discuss without having to run afoul of the "debate" approach.
 
#9
I am very interested in mediumship. I have been reading a couple of books by Prof Gary Schwartz, investigating mediums with absolutely mind blowing results. I was so enthused that I went to see a medium put on a show here in the centre of London, but sadly this was less than impressive.

I would love to hear other peoples experiences.
 
#10
Thanks Mazda. Sorry that you got slammed by the types of posting not appropriate to this sub-forum. I may ask for mod privileges just for this sub-forum so people can have a "safe" place to discuss without having to run afoul of the "debate" approach.
yea, I made it Mod+ pls move the skeptical silliness elsewhere.
 

Ian Gordon

Ninshub
Member
#11
It is very difficult to ascertain whether you are suggesting that mediumship is all fake smoke and mirrors, or something else.

In very plain terms, what are you saying about mediumship?

Also, what did you mean by the medium thought your name was rufus reardon? She/he was way off? You mean your name really is Tyler Snotgern? :(
I "liked" Tyler's posts because I read them as accepting the validity of mediumship (I have had evidence given to me about one of my parents (dead for over a half-century) that only my father, mother and I could possibly know. I had to look it up in a family genealogy book...that I wasn't aware that existed), but not of all instances of mediumistic communication (The medium, paid in cash, thought my name was Rufus Reardon).
 
#12
It is very difficult to ascertain whether you are suggesting that mediumship is all fake smoke and mirrors, or something else. In very plain terms, what are you saying about mediumship?
Mediumship

1) must pass through information that is only known to the sitter and the discarnate
2) that by definition is impossible for the medium to know
3) provides evidence of that physical death is survived.

To further increase the validity of this the mediums' pass-through to the sitter, the discarnate should provide information that is unknown at that that time to the sitter.

http://www.skeptiko.com/forum/threads/development-circle-for-mediumship.236/#post-3524

This is the simple but unequivocal test of a medium. They must mediate survival evidence, i.e. the information must be completely truthful and impossible for the medium to have used any means known to modern day man to know that information. The medium must be completely neutral, a message service not a message influencer.
Also, what did you mean by the medium thought your name was rufus reardon? She/he was way off? You mean your name really is Tyler Snotgern? :(
I told the medium who delivered survival evidence a false name. I lie. Discarnates understand and approve of this at least the ones who will provide information that proves the are physically dead who live on in another realm.

Let me be excruciatingly specific. Wherever I sit with any medium, I use someone else's car so the license plates don't lead back to me. I paid in cash. No credit card transactions that could be traced.

I take every precaution imaginable to keep any information from the medium which could be Googled, library lookups, home address, cell, email...everything. I am not the least bit interested in traveling 1 mile or 2,000 miles to have information passed to me that is contaminate by psi, PK or any nefarious course.

I only answer Yes/No to any questions a medium may ask of me.E.g. "Your mother loved apples". "Your Dad dies his hair? "Where were you born" gets no answer whatsoever.

I've been at this mediumship thing for decades. The number of 'mediums' especially 'psychic mediums' who dupe people with general answers and provide no survival of death data is mind boggling. I'm looking for evidence of survival and could absolutely care less if my aura is orange or my 50 yr now deceased mother hides in the windswept clothelines waiting for me or that my angels or on my left shoulder or that I am an old soul.

http://www.skeptiko.com/forum/threads/development-circle-for-mediumship.236/#post-3524

It is very difficult to ascertain whether you are suggesting that mediumship is all fake smoke and mirrors, or something else. In very plain terms, what are you saying about mediumship?
In very plain terms I am saying that mental and physical mediumship that evidences the survival of death is one of the most beautiful and trustworthy communication bridges we have with the spirit world. E.g. Leslie Flint - go listen to the spirit world having hundreds of conversations with us.

I refuse to put up with the enormous amount of pure rubbish that is unverifiable, New Agey BS and, IMO, worthless except for its entertainment value.
 
#14
I am very interested in mediumship. I have been reading a couple of books by Prof Gary Schwartz, investigating mediums with absolutely mind blowing results. I was so enthused that I went to see a medium put on a show here in the centre of London, but sadly this was less than impressive.

I would love to hear other peoples experiences.
Mental mediumship (such as our own Frank Matera) is replete with full blown liars, cheats and frauds. Forget them. Here's a specific formula to use.

If any medium, John Edward (verified), Therese Caputo (verified), Lisa Williams (verified) and thousands of other unknown to the Interwebs but nonetheless are verified, do not provide irrefutable information that you (sitter) and the person coming through from 'the other side' can only possibly know - that is impossible for the medium to know -

Then enjoy your experience with that medium but give the information you receive zero validation. Write of their fees as charitable donations. :)

Enjoy the show..and pass on. There are innumerable trustworthy mediums and even if they don't make a connection for you, they are, and their information can be, as real as blue skies and full moons in them.
 
#15
Mental mediumship (such as our own Frank Matera) is replete with full blown liars, cheats and frauds. Forget them. Here's a specific formula to use.

If any medium, John Edward (verified), Therese Caputo (verified), Lisa Williams (verified) and thousands of other unknown to the Interwebs but nonetheless are verified, do not provide irrefutable information that you (sitter) and the person coming through from 'the other side' can only possibly know - that is impossible for the medium to know -

Then enjoy your experience with that medium but give the information you receive zero validation. Write of their fees as charitable donations. :)

Enjoy the show..and pass on. There are innumerable trustworthy mediums and even if they don't make a connection for you, they are, and their information can be, as real as blue skies and full moons in them.
Very interesting stuff Tyler. And thanks as well for clearing up your position. I read and re-read your earlier posts and I really couldn't workout whether you were saying mediumship is all hocus pocus, or it is genuine. It is nice to hear you think it is genuine, and for me personally, I want to thank you for your warnings about the charlatans, and your sage advice that just because a show may not have lived up to my expectations, does not mean 1) the medium was not genuine, or 2) therefore all mediums are not genuine. I agree.
It is however very disheartening when you yourself are certain that mediumship is a real force in the world, and you try to share this with more skeptical members of your family, only to have a very weak display unfold before everyone, which even I had to admit got my skeptical antennae twitching. I had gone to this show hoping to see a replication of John Edward, who I am convinced is 100% authentic, but got something quite different. I will continue to investigate, and remain positive that validation may yet come, though I will not delude myself like many sadly can and do.

I couldn't agree more about getting validation of survival as being the most important aspect of a mediums role, and anything less, like the discarnates preference for tea over coffee, or favourite colour, or that they love you (which is important, though validates nothing) feels incredibly dubious.

The lengths you have gone to like driving others cars to a reading, for me may be over the top, but still such tight investigation is good for die hard skeptical types, and I commend you on your caution.

I would like to ask your advice on selecting a medium. I am in the UK, in London to be precise, and we have a place here called "The College of Psychic Studies", which has a good reputation, and a list of accredited psychics and mediums. I am trying to select a good medium, and they also offer telephone readings. What would you or anyone here suggest if anything?

(BTW I have seen the name Frank Matera around here on the forum. Why did you mention him?)

P.P.S. Coincidentally I listened to an interview with James Van Pragh today and he also mentioned Leslie Flint as a remarkable medium. I just now found on youtube, a recording of Flint purporting to be channelling Arthur Conan Doyle. After listening to it, I then listened to Arthur Conan Doyles voice recorded while he was alive, and while there was some similarity, what stood out mostly for me was that during Flints channelling, Sir Arthur had a wonderfully upper middle class English accent, however, in life, his accent was flecked with little but very obvious hints of Scottish which was entirely missing from Flints channelling session. I say this not as a skeptic with an agenda, but as someone looking with all my heart for validation who is also unable and unwilling to ignore my own evaluations and data which seem incongruous with the claims that here is an example of valid and genuine mediumship. How does one reconcile the difference between Flints Arthur Conan Doyle (without any hint of Scottish), and the man himself (accent with clear undertones of Scottish). What do you make of this, and how can it be explained? Does it cast doubt on the validity of Flints channelling? If not, why not?

Here is Flint:

Here is Sir Arthur:

Without being too presumptuous or ignorant, as a native of the British Isles, it is incredibly easy for me to hear a world of difference between the two accents, and I wonder if and fear that our American cousins may not be able to hear the difference as readily. Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
#16
great discovery soulatman

Maybe Zerdini will put a word in about Flint - he used to attend the sittings and made his own recordings.

You can listen to hundreds(for free) of them at the official site: http://www.leslieflint.com/recordingsnew.html

if you do , then you will come to discover that unless the communicator was more experienced - One, of a few, 'generic' voices were used by those on the other side.
also , if there was a more individualized voice used by the communicator, it will taper off, and become more generic as the power fluctuates, and as the the séance comes to a close.
 
#19
P.P.S. Coincidentally I listened to an interview with James Van Pragh today and he also mentioned Leslie Flint as a remarkable medium. I just now found on youtube, a recording of Flint purporting to be channelling Arthur Conan Doyle. After listening to it, I then listened to Arthur Conan Doyles voice recorded while he was alive, and while there was some similarity, what stood out mostly for me was that during Flints channelling, Sir Arthur had a wonderfully upper middle class English accent, however, in life, his accent was flecked with little but very obvious hints of Scottish which was entirely missing from Flints channelling session. I say this not as a skeptic with an agenda, but as someone looking with all my heart for validation who is also unable and unwilling to ignore my own evaluations and data which seem incongruous with the claims that here is an example of valid and genuine mediumship. How does one reconcile the difference between Flints Arthur Conan Doyle (without any hint of Scottish), and the man himself (accent with clear undertones of Scottish). What do you make of this, and how can it be explained? Does it cast doubt on the validity of Flints channelling? If not, why not?
Flint didn't channel.

Without being too presumptuous or ignorant, as a native of the British Isles, it is incredibly easy for me to hear a world of difference between the two accents, and I wonder if and fear that our American cousins may not be able to hear the difference as readily. Any thoughts?
Accents make no difference in independent direct voice. You need to research how the IDV occurs on both sides of the ectoplasmic larynx, the learning curve, the extreme difficulties, the power issues and the spirit controls.
 
#20
Mental mediumship (such as our own Frank Matera) is replete with full blown liars, cheats and frauds. Forget them. Here's a specific formula to use.

If any medium, John Edward (verified), Theresa Caputo (verified), Lisa Williams (verified) and thousands of other unknown to the Interwebs but nonetheless are verified, do not provide irrefutable information that you (sitter) and the person coming through from 'the other side' can only possibly know - that is impossible for the medium to know.

Then enjoy your experience with that medium but give the information you receive zero validation. Write off their fees as charitable donations. :)

Enjoy the show..and pass on. There are innumerable trustworthy mediums and even if they don't make a connection for you, they are, and their information can be, as real as blue skies and full moons in them.
 
Last edited:
Top