Mark Ireland, Medium Readings Can Help the Grieving |513|

#2
I contacted Mark and participated in a reading last week and I very much enjoyed the process and would gladly do it again.

His protocol is very straightforward. His assistant scheduled my reading with a medium that was being tested. We spent about an hour on a Zoom call. No video for the first part. Afterwards, I transcribed the statements and graded.

The medium with whom I did the reading was very nervous and she felt like her nerves got the best of her and she felt like she completely blew it.

On the other hand I did feel like she had some significant hits. The evidence was not of the quality that would persuade a skeptic, but was enough to make me feel connected to my recently departed loved one and helped me to feel some resolution to things that were unresolved before this person passed.

Grading her statements was actually quite difficult for a number of reasons so I ended up feeling compelled to add some commentary to some responses rather than simply leaving it at "correct" or "incorrect" or "indeterminable".
1) she seemed to be seeing my loved one at two different times in the person's life and she initially thought these were two separate people.
2) A lot of the statements were colorful and ambiguous kind of like brush strokes in a painting... taken individually they might not be easily classifiable as correct or incorrect or could be easily applicable to lots of people at some point in their lives, but as a whole these brush strokes paint a picture of the person and this requires a bit of interpretation or subjective input from myself.
3) Some of the hits were juxtaposed with incorrect statements or at least literally incorrect statements that could be interpreted symbolically as correct.
4) Some specifics seemed to be close in sound but just slightly off. For example, "a person here who's name is Kelly." Means nothing to me. "This person loved bananas." Incorrect. "A maternal figure that wants to brush your teeth." ... well my grandmother's name was Carlie and I called her Nana and when very young I called her Nana Banana. Maybe she heard Carlie as Kelly and Nana as Banana? Impossible to say... so I have to grade it as incorrect.

Anyway, it was fun. Thanks Mark for the opportunity! Also, I am reading Mark's book as I have time and enjoying it.
 
#3
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Yes absolutely. Knowledge and technology are inseparable. Knowledge has an implied use within it. Truth is that which is useful. A useful map is something that has some manner of fixedness or is in some way repeatable and rule-based. Since mediumship or any Psi related phenomena seems to have some rules (things that make it work better or worse and protocols that are repeatable) these can eventually be brought into a knowledge framework which will enable us to create something (technology) that augments the effects and increases the reliability.
 

Alex

Administrator
#4
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Yes absolutely. Knowledge and technology are inseparable. Knowledge has an implied use within it. Truth is that which is useful. A useful map is something that has some manner of fixedness or is in some way repeatable and rule-based. Since mediumship or any Psi related phenomena seems to have some rules (things that make it work better or worse and protocols that are repeatable) these can eventually be brought into a knowledge framework which will enable us to create something (technology) that augments the effects and increases the reliability.
nice. interesting reasoning. thx.
 
#5
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Yes absolutely. Knowledge and technology are inseparable. Knowledge has an implied use within it. Truth is that which is useful. A useful map is something that has some manner of fixedness or is in some way repeatable and rule-based. Since mediumship or any Psi related phenomena seems to have some rules (things that make it work better or worse and protocols that are repeatable) these can eventually be brought into a knowledge framework which will enable us to create something (technology) that augments the effects and increases the reliability.
I was very happy to see such a strong connection between Alex & Mark. Of course, technology is going to influence what we know about the other side. I was amazed long ago when a powerful woman I read a lot about said that the ability to write makes us more god-like b/c it gives us a way to express our thoughts, which I interpreted as a way to put the abstract into concrete form.
 

Alex

Administrator
#7
I was very happy to see such a strong connection between Alex & Mark. Of course, technology is going to influence what we know about the other side. I was amazed long ago when a powerful woman I read a lot about said that the ability to write makes us more god-like b/c it gives us a way to express our thoughts, which I interpreted as a way to put the abstract into concrete form.
nice one!
 
#8
Great interview with Mark. I would agree with Alex, I have no doubt that consciousness survives death and I feel I don't grieve the way others do, if at all? Obviously we all grieve differently, but I do understand we're all going to go, one way or another. I just try to be supportive of others who grieve more.

Michael Jackson on the "A-Team", good one Alex :)
 

Alex

Administrator
#9
Great interview with Mark. I would agree with Alex, I have no doubt that consciousness survives death and I feel I don't grieve the way others do, if at all? Obviously we all grieve differently, but I do understand we're all going to go, one way or another. I just try to be supportive of others who grieve more.

Michael Jackson on the "A-Team", good one Alex :)
right on... me too.
 
#10
Mark Ireland, Medium Readings Can Help the Grieving |513|
by Alex Tsakiris | Aug 10 | Uncategorized
Share
Tweet

Mark Ireland, helps grieving parents understand after death communication.
View attachment 1974
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Well, perhaps we should look at the relationship between science and technology first, before we answer that question. Most people assume that they are one and the same and they're not. Technology will always be a reflection of the kind of science that produces it. Our modern European-based culture has - since the Enlightenment - adopted values that are ever increasingly materialistic and mechanistic. The two go hand in hand, but even those of us who are critical of it tend to focus on the former without looking so much at the implications of the latter. The consequences of a mechanistic world-view are both insidious and fallacious, but as a culture, we don't even see it. Mechanistic science will always produce technologies of the same ilk, without exception. I've lost count of how many times scientists favoured by the mainstream media use machine metaphors to describe whatever they happen to be expert in, without even realising that they are only metaphors. It's embedded into the very language of modern science, going way beyond the absurdity of Dawkins' biological robot. My research into ancient cultures has shown me that those peoples did possess science, but they did not think of matter as fundamental; neither did they envisage the cosmos as clockwork, nor even as a giant computer. The limitations of our modern language and paradigm mean that archaeologists don't recognise those very differently sophisticated technologies, often writing them off as 'primitive'. We, today, have so much to learn - and to unlearn first.

As for 'shut up and get used to AI and transhumanism, because it's the future'. Are you serious? These are the very perverse technologies that epitomise mechanistic materialism and the globalist corporate control system that is its political corollary. It is nothing but a cartoon mockery of true consciousness and it is at the heart of the evil that you are wont to ponder so much. Western society is on the brink of an existential crisis and the 2020 plandemic was just the start of it.

I would be very interested in listening to an interview with Dr Iain McGilchrist with respect to understanding consciousness and how the brain functions.
 
Last edited:
#11
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Well, perhaps we should look at the relationship between science and technology first, before we answer that question. Most people assume that they are one and the same and they're not. Technology will always be a reflection of the kind of science that produces it. Our modern European-based culture has - since the Enlightenment - adopted values that are ever increasingly materialistic and mechanistic. The two go hand in hand, but even those of us who are critical of it tend to focus on the former without looking so much at the implications of the latter. The consequences of a mechanistic world-view are both insidious and fallacious, but as a culture, we don't even see it. Mechanistic science will always produce technologies of the same ilk, without exception. I've lost count of how many times scientists favoured by the mainstream media use machine metaphors to describe whatever they happen to be expert in, without even realising that they are only metaphors. It's embedded into the very language of modern science, going way beyond the absurdity of Dawkins' biological robot. My research into ancient cultures has shown me that those peoples did possess science, but they did not think of matter as fundamental; neither did they envisage the cosmos as clockwork, nor even as a giant computer. The limitations of our modern language and paradigm mean that archaeologists don't recognise those very differently sophisticated technologies, often writing them off as 'primitive'. We, today, have so much to learn - and to unlearn first.

As for 'shut up and get used to AI and transhumanism, because it's the future'. Are you serious? These are the very perverse technologies that epitomise mechanistic materialism and the globalist corporate control system that is its political corollary. It is nothing but a cartoon mockery of true consciousness and it is at the heart of the evil that you are wont to ponder so much. Western society is on the brink of an existential crisis and the 2020 plandemic was just the start of it.

I would be very interested in listening to an interview with Dr Iain McGilchrist with respect to understanding consciousness and how the brain functions.
I recently read a comment that many ppl are entranced w/ the achievements & apparent capabilities of technology; a lot of the ardor re: science is a misplaced admiration due to technological advances. As Alex likes to point out, science actually gets a majority of things wrong b/c of this 'hard problem' of consciousness.
So, now we've got an IPCC report that states that 'unequivocal evidence' is before us that climate change is of human origin. I fully agree w/ Greta Thunberg's reaction that this is nothing new. This has been predicted over & over for decades. I don't think the substantial effort will be made to halt further warming b/c ppl apparently lack the ability to connect their activities to environmental degradation, among other things. I have a friend in Texas, an otherwise intelligent man, but a right-winger climate change denier. At least 12 years ago, the winter had been abnormally warm & then suddenly there was an arctic blast w/ heavy snow in Texas. "See!" he exclaimed. "Global warming my ass!" Instead, this is an early example of the wild swings in temperature, rainfall, drought, flooding, etc. that we are seeing even more of today.
The good news is Mother Nature's immune response to the parasitic presence of far too many 'termite ppl,' a term Brazilian jungle dwellers gave to westerners in the movie, The Emerald Forest, may reduce the human population sufficiently & disrupt our chronic destruction of the biosphere enough to halt climate change. Many, many serious thinkers say this is necessary as we enter the Age of Aquarius, rid ourselves of the predatory masculine domination of nature & replace it w/ feminine, healing energies, leave the Last Havoc & enter the First Havoc, etc. Extreme AI, quantum computers, the Singularity, & so on are unlikely things to happen as human civilization is crushed for the 89th time.
I agree w/ your suggestion of having Dr. Iain McGilchrist on Skeptiko just b/c he's got a cool beard, if nothing else. Thanks for the link to Utube about him!
 
#12
Question at the end: do we think technology can play a role in after death communication?

Well, perhaps we should look at the relationship between science and technology first, before we answer that question. Most people assume that they are one and the same and they're not. Technology will always be a reflection of the kind of science that produces it. Our modern European-based culture has - since the Enlightenment - adopted values that are ever increasingly materialistic and mechanistic. The two go hand in hand, but even those of us who are critical of it tend to focus on the former without looking so much at the implications of the latter. The consequences of a mechanistic world-view are both insidious and fallacious, but as a culture, we don't even see it. Mechanistic science will always produce technologies of the same ilk, without exception. I've lost count of how many times scientists favoured by the mainstream media use machine metaphors to describe whatever they happen to be expert in, without even realising that they are only metaphors. It's embedded into the very language of modern science, going way beyond the absurdity of Dawkins' biological robot. My research into ancient cultures has shown me that those peoples did possess science, but they did not think of matter as fundamental; neither did they envisage the cosmos as clockwork, nor even as a giant computer. The limitations of our modern language and paradigm mean that archaeologists don't recognise those very differently sophisticated technologies, often writing them off as 'primitive'. We, today, have so much to learn - and to unlearn first.

As for 'shut up and get used to AI and transhumanism, because it's the future'. Are you serious? These are the very perverse technologies that epitomise mechanistic materialism and the globalist corporate control system that is its political corollary. It is nothing but a cartoon mockery of true consciousness and it is at the heart of the evil that you are wont to ponder so much. Western society is on the brink of an existential crisis and the 2020 plandemic was just the start of it.

I would be very interested in listening to an interview with Dr Iain McGilchrist with respect to understanding consciousness and how the brain functions.
What does the word "mechanistic" or "mechanism" mean to you? I think to most people this word means reliably rigidly repeatable. "Mechanistic" is then in opposition to something like choice or randomness or something completely new and unpredictable.

Now what are the qualities of "good science"? You design an experiment with a rigid protocol that ensures both the experiment and the results are reliably repeatable. What is discovered by science then is a rule that holds true or is reliably repeatable within a particular domain.

Therefore science can only discover things that could be described as "mechanistic".

What type of science are you suggesting that is not "mechanistic"?
 
#13
Now what are the qualities of "good science"? You design an experiment with a rigid protocol that ensures both the experiment and the results are reliably repeatable. What is discovered by science then is a rule that holds true or is reliably repeatable within a particular domain.
Except of course, a QM experiment is only repeatable in a statistical sense. If this counts as being mechanistic, then so is Dean Radin's presentiment experiment, and the Ganzfeld experiments and a whole lot more.

David
 
#14
Except of course, a QM experiment is only repeatable in a statistical sense. If this counts as being mechanistic, then so is Dean Radin's presentiment experiment, and the Ganzfeld experiments and a whole lot more.

David
Many experiments are done on multi-variate systems where individual discrete outcomes are not computable (chaos theory or other unknowns or confounding rules) but bulk outcomes are statistically predictable. This doesn't mean there are two types of science - one for mechanism and one for something else. I still hold to the idea that science can only ever discover the "mechanistic" aspects of reality since it is a tool for discovering things that reliably repeat.
 
#15
Just finished listening. Great Episode.

I liked the tee up question about Technology and Spirituality. I can spitball at it with a raised-LDS angle.
I was taught: Before humans came to earth, there was a debate/war started in heaven between Jesus and Lucifer as to who's plan would best redeem God's children. Jesus's plan was for everyone to be born and learn to love God by faith. Lucifer's plan was to allow for no free will, and he argued that all would have obey. 1/3 followed Jesus and lined up to live Earth lives, and 2/3 followed Lucifer and don't get to have human bodies.

So.. (if the above is true, or true-ish), technology would totally be a tool for Lucifers team, but I would guess they would have to access by proxy via influencing humans in order to accomplish whatever they want to accomplish (not having bodies, or access to the physical realm). I also think it would make sense for Artificial Intelligence to be an amplification of the same, such that if it is created on a foundation of evil, it would lead toward an evil-human singularity if nothing stops it.


The only other thought I had on the interview is that it might be about time to start pushing harder on the Mediums, Psychics, and RV's, to give up more details on Where these entities exist. They always seem to say "I can't say for sure", but F that, If they're spending 1000's of hours There, they know where There is! And I think it's about time we start demanding they go out on a limb a little more. Our entire species is being genetically experimented on and who knows if we win this battle.
 
#16
I'm betting that spirits exist on a particular part or bandwidth of the spectrum of vibrations that's not accessible to the five senses. I got that perception from listening Robin Foy's talks on New Thinking Allowed. He & his bunch of evidential mediums have produced amazing results. I believe he's about to start another long-term study. His experiments have produced materializations of spirits, images cast on photographic film, & disembodied voices in the sitting room, among other things. There's even an ET they call Blue.
My experience w/ Sacred Acoustics's Cosmic Womb during meditation gave me more reliable brief glimpses of another dimension or frequency, whatever you may wish to call it. After quite a few of these experiences, I noticed that they were practically indistinguishable from my dreams. The biggest problem for me is staying in that state longer. It's like I realize I'm having this "person" putting their face up close to mine & grinning & I break contact from the surprise. I have to learn to stay relaxed while "viewing" whatever is going on.
 
#17
I remember protocols in the psi literature trying aggregate information from multiple sources to improve the quality of the data but it did not work, if memory serves me right here. Dr. Beishel has 18 mediums, so maybe that is enough to overlap each others readings to see if that improves the quality? That is a very interesting research question since the hit rate without mediumship is about 30 percent according to her.

It is exciting that her research is being replicated in italy:


But, I think the soulphone has more promise. I am super bummed that few wealthy people want to support it. I know he has some support here and there, but apparently money is the bottleneck.

Anyone remember the opinion of the idealist Bernardo Kastrup on the afterlife? He stated intention would be interesting evidence or would persuade him more than historical cases like skilled chess. But its easy to be fooled. So he must have a clear idea of what counts as intention.

Mediums claim they can tell the difference between psi and connection to another person. IT just feels different. I would be curious to know if there is any way to analyze that in a scientific way.
 
#18
nice. interesting reasoning. thx.
Another point to make in regards to technology and psi… a protocol is a form of technology. The internet is technology. It is essentially a communication protocol TCP/IP HTTP etc.

So any type of remote viewing or mediumship protocol is a type of technology.
 
#19
I remember protocols in the psi literature trying aggregate information from multiple sources to improve the quality of the data but it did not work, if memory serves me right here. Dr. Beishel has 18 mediums, so maybe that is enough to overlap each others readings to see if that improves the quality? That is a very interesting research question since the hit rate without mediumship is about 30 percent according to her.

It is exciting that her research is being replicated in italy:


But, I think the soulphone has more promise. I am super bummed that few wealthy people want to support it. I know he has some support here and there, but apparently money is the bottleneck.

Anyone remember the opinion of the idealist Bernardo Kastrup on the afterlife? He stated intention would be interesting evidence or would persuade him more than historical cases like skilled chess. But its easy to be fooled. So he must have a clear idea of what counts as intention.

Mediums claim they can tell the difference between psi and connection to another person. IT just feels different. I would be curious to know if there is any way to analyze that in a scientific way.
That's an intriguing idea. I'd never thought about there being any difference b/c as Jeffrey Mishlove discussed in The PK Man, it becomes very difficult to separate which ability is being used. Did Ted Owens summon the SIS or did he use precognition to predict their appearance? After all, I think psychics tune in to the wave versus the particle state of being, where there's no time, no distance, just the One.
 
#20
That's an intriguing idea. I'd never thought about there being any difference b/c as Jeffrey Mishlove discussed in The PK Man, it becomes very difficult to separate which ability is being used. Did Ted Owens summon the SIS or did he use precognition to predict their appearance? After all, I think psychics tune in to the wave versus the particle state of being, where there's no time, no distance, just the One.
The hope is analogous to normal people trying to remember what is in a room. They will focus on different parts of the scene.

Here is a quote from Dr. Pitstick in a recent email for the soulphone:

"
Q1: Can I communicate with more than one departed person in a session?


A: in principle, yes, just as a phone can be passed to different people in the home you call. At this time during research, questions have to be entered into computer beforehand so postmaterial persons can hear and see the instructions / requests. However, our goal is to allow real time communication with the device user speaking aloud and receiving responses.
"

He just said postmaterial persons cannot hear you unless you type into his special computer system!

But obviously mediums report seeing "dead" people. So he is now saying the device is what allows the communication, whereas I am pretty darn sure spirits are communicating in seances without a device. This is all very odd.


Nevermind. None of that is a response to your point. The source of psi problem is still a problem. But maybe the soulphone could solve it. It would for me at least. I guess it could be an AI from the future of something but its not information coming from us. Assuming it works. I don't have much hope that it will.
 
Last edited:
Top