IADC and Allan Botkin

#1
What do people think about IADC (Induced After-Death Communication) and Allan Botkin, who came up with the technique. Botkin would be a great guest for Alex. There is enough similarity with NDEs and it's amazing how Botkins is able to treat PTSD and grief with this technique. People are able to resolve their grief by encountering their deceased loved ones. It's a mini-NDE without the trauma and heavy brething of a full-blown NDE.

Yet Botkin remains humble and tries to be objective, not claiming that his IADC proves anything. He does not overreach and is open to other possibilities.
 
#2
What do people think about IADC (Induced After-Death Communication) and Allan Botkin, who came up with the technique. Botkin would be a great guest for Alex. There is enough similarity with NDEs and it's amazing how Botkins is able to treat PTSD and grief with this technique. People are able to resolve their grief by encountering their deceased loved ones. It's a mini-NDE without the trauma and heavy brething of a full-blown NDE.

Yet Botkin remains humble and tries to be objective, not claiming that his IADC proves anything. He does not overreach and is open to other possibilities.
IADCs may be real communication with deceased persons, but I am suspicious that there seems to be some relation to the hypnotic suggestibility of the subconscious mind.

My impression of the IADC phenomenon is that it may be generated by some deep level of the mind that wants to heal itself and responds to suggestion, rather than actual communication with the deceased. In this interpretation the patient comes to the therapist for help with a particular emotional problem, a hurting inside. He has a hope and an expectation that amounts to self-suggestion. The induced eye movement technique may in itself do nothing - instead it gives an excuse to the psyche: the patient’s subconscious mind wants to be healed and generates or confabulates an experience of communication from the deceased that relieves the guilt and distress. It is certainly awfully convenient that there always is instant forgiveness regardless of who the departed soul may be and wherever it now may be and however long ago the traumatic event occurred. And children and infants appear generally to still be very young human personalities despite their now discarnate soul nature.

IADC appears to be related to past life regression therapy, where generally what seems to happen is a similar confabulatory response of the deep mind to the need for healing, in response to suggestions by the therapist. This is why Stevenson rejected hypnotic regression as a reliable method in reincarnation research. IADC may also be related to Moody’s psychomanteum.

But there are always complications in finding any plausible explanation. There are apparently a few cases where the IADC communicant comes in contact with someone thought to be alive but actually dead. These would have to be explained as an example of psychically derived information used to prop up the confabulation, a form of “super-psi”. Certainly the least complicated explanation in these cases is simply communication with the dead person.

Also on the other side of the issue, Alan Botkin has indicated that in his experience attempts at suggestion during the IADC induction tend to inhibit the phenomenon, and that therapists have to use their ingenuity in misdirection and other techniques to get around the expectation inherent in someone going to the therapist. Further, the mechanism behind the induced eye motion technique appears to be fundamentally different than hypnosis. And finally, the content of IADCs is somewhat consistent with spontaneous crisis apparitions, NDEs, and death bed visions. None of these experiences are suggested, and don't seem to depend on beliefs, desire to have the experience, etc.
 
#3
That's exactly why Botkin isn't drawing any firm conclusions. He's a therapist by vocation. So he can't be biased or make any unfounded claims either. But the comparison with Moody's psychomanteum is apt. In both cases you have to "call" the person you want to encounter, usually someone who wronged you or been wronged by.

I wasn't aware that there are cases where the non-deceased appear in IADCs. Are you sure?

My real curiosity here has to do with the uniformly forgiving and pleasant IADC experiences vis-à-vis NDEs that feature hellish experiences to the tune of in 1 in 5. Why would there be no such experience? Yes, there is always the issue of suggestibility. But in all the IADCs? I think you're right that this might be in some ways more similar to psychic readings by someone like John Edward, where you're always told that your loved ones are ok. It's time to let go. Live your life, etc. You never hear of an instance when the deceased curses at the living.

That raises another disturbing possibility. The so called IADCs (and possibly NDEs) may be a phenomema induced by Jinns, the mischievous trickster which likes to play games and confound the living by showing up through Ouiji Boards. Jinns (and their Western equivalents -- i.e., leprochauns, fairies) and those in-between spirits have access to the Akashic Record, according to Swedenborg.

If that is, so, how can we really be sure of anything? Eben Alexander said that he believes hellish experiences are incomplete NDEs, as his NDE was somewhat hellish (but not overly so), when he was mired in pus and muck for what seemed like "eons." But it's also possible that everyone's NDE is incomplete; what if the orb or (what Nanci Danilson calls the Source) actually is a playful Jinn masquerading as God? If I were a fundamentalist Christian, that would be my argument for all pagan yet pleasant NDEs; they're deceptive and incomplete, misrepresenting the hellish NDEs that may follow such initially positive intros.

See where I'm going here? We really do not know. And it goes back to the heart of "Fear and Trembling." That's what Kierkegaard said, that you have to put your trust in God -- the God that tried to test Abraham by telling him to sacrifice his son is really Him, not some Jinn that's playing tricks on Abraham.

After reading Nancy Evans Bush, I'm convinced that a distinct minority of NDEs is indeed hellish and unpleasant. And that NDEs are just not as one-sided as they've been portrayed. And my point here regarding IADCs, psychic readings, etc. is that it is indeed strange that they would almost always be pleasant -- too pleasant, to tell you the truth, and too "packaged," if you know what I mean. As John Keel said, this is a haunted planet, with pockets of frightening evil and deceitful spirits that would scare our socks off whether we encounter them while living or dead.

IADC may also be related to Moody’s psychomanteum.
 
Last edited:
#4
I wasn't aware that there are cases where the non-deceased appear in IADCs. Are you sure?
In an interesting blog entry (that I commented in) Michael Tymn recounted a private communication from Alan Botkin in which he described similarities between IADCs and NDEs. One of the similarities was that in some IADCs as in some NDEs there were encounters where the communicants were thought to be alive but turned out really to be dead. http://whitecrowbooks.com/michaelty...osure_with_induced_after_death_communication/

If that is, so, how can we really be sure of anything?
We really can't be absolutely certain of anything other than that we exist as a conscious entity. All else could be deception of some sort. Of course this sort of thinking could be the intellect going wild in ignoring the mostly positive transformative results with deep NDEs, and the apparently uniformly positive results of successful IADC inductions. It seems reasonable to judge the tree by its fruits.
 
#5
Right, I've heard this in ADCs as well as NDEs. Those who appear are always dead. I misinterpreted what you said; I thought you said those still living appear in NDEs and they turn out to be still living, not dead. You're right the simplest explanation is they're coming from the dead.

However, I don't think we can be that trusting given what we know about the trickster aspect of the paranormal: In channeling, many entities that come through claim to be all sorts of beings. They're almost always deceptive. The same with UFO abduction experiences where the abducted are told outright lies. These turn out to be "absurd" lies, as Vallee calls them. When a Frenchman says something other than life is absurd, you have to take notice. Have you ever read "The Siren Call of Hungry Ghosts" by Joe Fisher? He wrote an expose of many channeled entities that turned out to be impostors. They're "hungry ghosts," similar to in-between spirits that do not go to the light, unable to divorce themselves from the earthly pleasures they sought and were addicted to while alive. The author also wrote a book on reincarnation. He ended up committing suicide, presumably due to being tormented by the channeled entities that he exposed in his book.

http://www.amazon.com/Siren-Call-Hungry-Ghosts-Investigation/dp/1931044023

If we conclude that these aspects of the paranormal are driven by deception, then what are we to conclude about John Edward-style psychic readings and reincarnation memories? Yes, Occam's Razor says they're real. But there is an alternative explanation that has nothing to do with suggestibility or hypnosis gone wild. It's the mischief being wrought by Jinns and fairies. They love to vex people, weave elaborate tales, spend endless hours entertaining, indulging and tormenting the living, who are outside the veil. They derive enormous vicarious pleasure from confusing and tormenting us. That is fine, these are Jinns and fairies, who are for the most part, harmless, right?

But if you've read John Lamb Lash and his position on Archons, one of the the powers that they have is the ability to "manipulate reality" and "create virtual reality." Archons basically act like angels or demons in gnostic versions of the Bible.

http://www.metahistory.org/gnostique/archonfiles/AlienIntrusion.php

Now, in some of the really disturbing UFO abduction tales, this is what happens. These alien abductors transform themselves into beings familiar to the victim (e.g., family members) for deception. They engage in shape-shifting. This is what happened in Ms. Turner's abduction tales. Is it possible that these Archons could not only be behind UFO abductions but ADCs, psychic readings, and NDEs? If they have the resources (the Akashic Record) under their disposal, they could and might.

There is no way to know. Eben Alexander's and Anita Moorjani's NDEs are prototypical NDEs that are infinitely uplifting. But it's disturbing that that's not all there is. A distinct minority always seems to be demonic -- they parallel elaborate UFO abduction experiences and bogus channeled entities. Another distinct minority seems to be of the fundamentalist variety, affirming orthodox and extreme religious view involving hell and eternal suffering. If true, it's amazing what lengths these Archons (Jinns/Fairies) would go to stage such experiences.

Once again, this goes back to Vallee: these UFO abduction stories are always absurd. Not just absurd but monumentally absurd. You can't help but feel the same way when reading tales of reincarnation involving past lives as celebrities or how family members and loved ones reincarnate together in groups. The most absurd reincarnation tale I've heard is from Nanci Danilson's NDE, where she recounts her past life as a gas-type of being. In one of her past life, she was not a person, not a dog, not a anything multicellular but a type of gas. I'm sorry, that's just too absurd!

We really can't be absolutely certain of anything other than that we exist as a conscious entity. All else could be deception of some sort. Of course this sort of thinking could be the intellect going wild in ignoring the mostly positive transformative results with deep NDEs, and the apparently uniformly positive results of successful IADC inductions. It seems reasonable to judge the tree by its fruits.
 
Last edited:
#6
Once again, this goes back to Vallee: these UFO abduction stories are always absurd. Not just absurd but monumentally absurd. You can't help but feel the same way when reading tales of reincarnation involving past lives as celebrities or how family members and loved ones reincarnate together in groups. The most absurd reincarnation tale I've heard is from Nanci Danilson's NDE, where she recounts her past life as a gas-type of being. In one of her past life, she was not a person, not a dog, not a anything multicellular but a type of gas. I'm sorry, that's just too absurd!
Well, to many people, the idea of reincarnation in any form at all is absurd. I'm not sure that we can claim to know enough about the concept of reincarnation to be able to judge which are valid and which invalid mechanisms. Certainly in any individual case there may be reason to doubt the account, but I've a feeling that in the West the conventional view has been so hostile towards the idea of reincarnation that at this stage our collective view of what is or is not absurd is illuminated only by the small chink of light that has been let in by accepting even a minimal tolerance of the concept of reincarnation.

It could take a good deal longer before our collective view of the concept of reincarnation is both broad and deep enough for us to assess what are and are not valid instances. In the short and medium term, I feel we need to leave our options open, not by swallowing wholesale and without question everything we hear, but by regarding the accounts which come to light as part of an "evidence gathering" phase. Only after gathering much more information on reincarnation will it be possible to start to draw some tentative conclusions on how it works.
 
#7
Have you ever read "The Siren Call of Hungry Ghosts" by Joe Fisher? He wrote an expose of many channeled entities that turned out to be impostors. They're "hungry ghosts," similar to in-between spirits that do not go to the light, unable to divorce themselves from the earthly pleasures they sought and were addicted to while alive. The author also wrote a book on reincarnation. He ended up committing suicide, presumably due to being tormented by the channeled entities that he exposed in his book.

http://www.amazon.com/Siren-Call-Hungry-Ghosts-Investigation/dp/1931044023

If we conclude that these aspects of the paranormal are driven by deception, then what are we to conclude about John Edward-style psychic readings and reincarnation memories? Yes, Occam's Razor says they're real. But there is an alternative explanation that has nothing to do with suggestibility or hypnosis gone wild. It's the mischief being wrought by Jinns and fairies. They love to vex people, weave elaborate tales, spend endless hours entertaining, indulging and tormenting the living, who are outside the veil. They derive enormous vicarious pleasure from confusing and tormenting us. That is fine, these are Jinns and fairies, who are for the most part, harmless, right?
What happens is that this approach presupposes the existence of an afterlife for all human beings and postmortem communication is possible, and this is the main interest to researchers in these subjects. Perhaps this old thread interests you:

http://forum.mind-energy.net/skepti...s-spiritualism-haunting-story-joe-fisher.html

Once again, this goes back to Vallee: these UFO abduction stories are always absurd. Not just absurd but monumentally absurd. You can't help but feel the same way when reading tales of reincarnation involving past lives as celebrities or how family members and loved ones reincarnate together in groups. The most absurd reincarnation tale I've heard is from Nanci Danilson's NDE, where she recounts her past life as a gas-type of being. In one of her past life, she was not a person, not a dog, not a anything multicellular but a type of gas. I'm sorry, that's just too absurd!
I would make the following distinction:

1. Reports of abductions, channeling and hypnotic regressions.

2. Reports of NDEs, trance mediumship (Eileen Garrett, Gladys Osborne Leonard) and cases of children who seem to remember past lives.

The cases of the first group seem confabulations of the unconscious, but due to certain details, the cases of the second group seem genuine and point to an afterlife.
 
#8
So it's been discussed before. Thanks, I'll examine that thread! Once you read that book, you'll never forget it. You'll forever be skeptical and question some of the most uplifting NDEs. It's creepy and right up there with Keel's Mothman and Vallee's Messengers of Deception. I'd count that among the 5 best paranormal books I've read (along with Mothman, Deception, and Daniel Pinchbeck's "Breaking Open the Head").

I believe alien abductions, channeling and hypnotic regressions are all related phenomena perpetrated by inorganic entities that we may call "Archons" or "Jinns". But so are Ouiji Board entities. And I also tend to think psychic readings may be contaminated by these spirits. There are no secrets in the afterworld and they will have access to every living person's memories. That's why people believe what comes through Ouija Boards are the spirits of their loved ones; they tell stories that only you and the deceased would know. The same thing happens in psychic readings: you "confirm and validate" by virtue of these shared secrets. By the same token, you can use that power to frighten people by initially endearing yourself to the living. This happened with Fisher and other tales he shares.

If you take alien abduction phenomena literally, that they may not be physical but "virtual reality" phenomenon, then you can envision such spirits being able to ensnare you even in NDEs. I'm not familiar with trance mediumship (except perhaps Edgar Cayce, John of God and Seth). You can say they are not malevolent. In fact, Fisher addresses such trance mediums in his book. His conclusion: most seem to be less than benevolent spirits; maybe one or two aren't (Silver Birch). And as for children's past life memories, those could also be deeds of mischief -- implanted memories. The real crux here is that these mischievous and malevolent spirits have the power to create virtual reality, as Lash says. Such powers are enormously useful in UFO abduction experiences and, shall I say, even NDEs -- well, perhaps not all of them but in those that are less than heavenly.

But the crux here is the inference we can make based on this. If Archons can create virtual reality at will, they don't have to limit themselves to mere UFO abductions. They can ensnare the gullible and start religious movements. All great religions, including the 3 Abrahamic religions, trace their origins to supernatural events. Vallee's point is exactly that with regard to Catholic miracles: these are basically no different than UFO encounters, only the aliens tailored themselves to the Catholic believer by posing as Mother Mary or Catholic saints.

This is exactly what Gnostics said about the Archons: they can affect our minds by subliminal conditioning techniques. Their main tactics are mental error (intellectual virus, or false ideology, especially religious doctrines) and simulation. Archons are predatory, unlike a wide range of non-human and other-dimensional beings also know to the Gnostics, beings who are benevolent or neutral toward humanity
.

If you take this reasoning further, these Archons may have played a key role in fomenting rebellions, ideological movements (communism), religious fanaticism (fundamentalist extremism), racism, nationalism, and any other collective movements driven by mob mentality. They vicariously derive thrill and are energized by human suffering. This is very sweeping but that is the thesis of William Bramley's "The Gods of Eden." Say, you can't reconcile the Punishing God of the Old Testament with the Forgiving God of the New Testament? Maybe they're 2 separate entities. If they're acting as a "control system" a la Vallee, there may indeed be a battle between good and evil that we are not seeing behind the veil.

1. Reports of abductions, channeling and hypnotic regressions.
2. Reports of NDEs, trance mediumship (Eileen Garrett, Gladys Osborne Leonard) and cases of children who seem to remember past lives.

The cases of the first group seem confabulations of the unconscious, but due to certain details, the cases of the second group seem genuine and point to an afterlife.
 
Last edited:
#9
I work with ADC on a daily basis in my clinical practice. I had a conversation with Borkin a few years ago and then lost track of him. Communicating with the dead appears to be a built in ability of human perception. During my years of work in this field, I have met very few people who are incapable of such communication. The heavy bias against ADC contributes to the epidemic of mental health disorders.
 
Top