Scole Experiments and the future of mediumship studies

[Will]

The pieces of Scole that strike me as the most impossible to fake were the dematerialising crystal and the lights that could be grasped and that could pass through objects and people. I've not heard of any objections from Gauld et al, or from anyone else, but if such exist, I'd be very interested in hearing about it.

 

[MasterWu]

The pieces of Scole that strike me as the most impossible to fake were the dematerialising crystal and the lights that could be grasped and that could pass through objects and people. I've not heard of any objections from Gauld et al, or from anyone else, but if such exist, I'd be very interested in hearing about it.

Apparently one of the three psychic experts who critiques the Scole managed to replicate it. They never explain how, but he seem to have convinced two psychic investigators who attended two sittings at Scole, so perhaps it's not that impossible. I'll look at it, since my memory is kind of dusty with respect to that.

 

[Obiwan]

Apparently one of the three psychic experts who critiques the Scole managed to replicate it. They never explain how, but he seem to have convinced two psychic investigators who attended two sittings at Scole, so perhaps it's not that impossible. I'll look at it, since my memory is kind of dusty with respect to that.

I think we need a bit more than you mention here. Even if it is replicable, that is not evidence that the same technique was used at Scole or that observers would be deceived by it.

 

[MasterWu]

I think we need a bit more than you mention here. Even if it is replicable, that is not evidence that the same technique was used at Scole or that observers would be deceived by it.

Well, you are right of course. But something that the investigators found noteworthy of the Scole was that the "other side" also was willing to provide things that can't be normally explained, as proof that the other side exists, and it's a loving place ( or something like that ), so it does come as strange that they might use methods that may be replicable by normal means, so that is also something one needs to take into account.

 

[Obiwan]

I have just re-read the section on Scole from David Fontana's excellent book "Is There An Afterlife?". On pages 341-343 he addresses the subject of some of the example images on unexposed film. It looks to me like he understands the process and was perfectly aware of the potential weaknesses.

 

[Obiwan]

Well, you are right of course. But something that the investigators found noteworthy of the Scole was that the "other side" also was willing to provide things that can't be normally explained, as proof that the other side exists, and it's a loving place ( or something like that ), so it does come as strange that they might use methods that may be replicable by normal means, so that is also something one needs to take into account.

What methods do you propose, that you know the group would be capable of using which fit your criteria?

 

[MasterWu]

What methods do you propose, that you know the group would be capable of using which fit your criteria?

Well, for example, one of the films had marks of a common procedure involving acetate, which leaved some collored marks here and there. Now, this spirits were, apparently, capable of moving objects (the trumpet case), getting inside a person (when they talked ), travelling back in time and across space (the 1945 Apported newspaper ), producing light (the numerous light claims ), and touching physical objects. ¿Is it far-fetched to think that they perhaps could have simply erased the collored marks of the films?

 

[MasterWu]

I have just re-read the section on Scole from David Fontana's excellent book "Is There An Afterlife?". On pages 341-343 he addresses the subject of some of the example images on unexposed film. It looks to me like he understands the process and was perfectly aware of the potential weaknesses.

Yes, he was. But from what I've been reading he didn't took many preventions. I haven't found so far as film that produces a significant result that wasn't in Alan Box, wasn't provided by one of the mediums, or doesn't have marks that could point to it being manufactured.

 

[Obiwan]

Yes, he was. But from what I've been reading he didn't took many preventions. I haven't found so far as film that produces a significant result that wasn't in Alan Box, wasn't provided by one of the mediums, or doesn't have marks that could point to it being manufactured.

What are you reading?

The precautions, although not foolproof, in some instances looked sufficient to me. Eg sealed canister, secretly marked film and didn't leave the possession of one of the researchers.

 

[Obiwan]

Well, for example, one of the films had marks of a common procedure involving acetate, which leaved some collored marks here and there. Now, this spirits were, apparently, capable of moving objects (the trumpet case), getting inside a person (when they talked ), travelling back in time and across space (the 1945 Apported newspaper ), producing light (the numerous light claims ), and touching physical objects. ¿Is it far-fetched to think that they perhaps could have simply erased the collored marks of the films?

I guess so, if it occurred to them.

 

[Formal Dining Room Set]

So how would that orb going into that woman's knee and moving around being explained, for example? Can magicians do this? Was she lying? Were all the participants deceived or lying? Was Sheldrake deceived by the the 'illusion' of a disembodied hand? Is he lying?

Even if these effects could be produced by magic it would require the work of the greatest magician of all time. Who was the magician that set all this up?

 

[Obiwan]

So how would that orb going into that woman's knee and moving around being explained, for example? Can magicians do this? Was she lying? Were all the participants deceived or lying? Was Sheldrake deceived by the the 'illusion' of a disembodied hand? Is he lying?

Even if these effects could be produced by magic it would require the work of the greatest magician of all time. Who was the magician that set all this up?

These are good points too FDRS. David Fontana covers many of the points in the book I referred to above. I don't know whether MasterWu is referring to pictures taken under the controls mentioned by DF or those taken in earlier sessions by the group when DF wasn't present.

 

[MasterWu]

What are you reading?

Preecedings of Psychis Research, Volume 58.

The precautions, although not foolproof, in some instances looked sufficient to me. Eg sealed canister, secretly marked film and didn't leave the possession of one of the researchers.

Well, in my opinion most weren't that good. Like for example, allowing Foy to bring his own film in one ocassion, allowing one of the relatives of the mediums to create the most succesfull box that produced images, the darkness and the sound that limit a lot of what can be seen or heard, and the disallowance of thermal image objects ( although this one is strange. They never give quite a good explanation as to why it was left behind. It wasn't electricity apparently, because there was a tape recorder. Nor it was light because thermal images don't produce or emit visible light. Perhaps the spirits had reasons they didn't told them though ).

 

[MasterWu]

I guess so, if it occurred to them.

I don't know, the spirits seem to be capable of such a task and also willing to do so, yet they didn't.

 

[MasterWu]

So how would that orb going into that woman's knee and moving around being explained, for example? Can magicians do this? Was she lying? Were all the participants deceived or lying? Was Sheldrake deceived by the the 'illusion' of a disembodied hand? Is he lying?

I don't know how it can be done, I'm not a magician, but I recall one of the psychics expert investigators that claimed he replicated many of the lights with help and that he convinced some persons who were in those sittings. IIRC, I read at some place in the internet a quote from one of the magicians involved that claimed that he didn't know how it was done, unless a lot of preparation was involved although perhaps there was a lot of preparation, I'll need to search it. For some reason, so far the assistance hypothesis hasn't been adressed too much in what I've read.

As for the woman, I don't think she was lying, but she may have an inacurrate representation of the events, plus I don't think many or most of the particpants at the seance gave their testimony, the woman, IIRC was the one at San Francisco, and that one wasn't taped. Humans can be unreliable in some ocassions, and there is some work done by Wiseman of unreliability on seances. As for Sheldrake, I don't think he saw an illusion. He probably saw a human hand. There are some sitting where there where reported occlusions ( that is, that something pass in front of ) of the legs desks, and also hands, which could suggest assistance in my opinion.

 

[MasterWu]

These are good points too FDRS. David Fontana covers many of the points in the book I referred to above. I don't know whether MasterWu is referring to pictures taken under the controls mentioned by DF or those taken in earlier sessions by the group when DF wasn't present.

Well, we can go one by one if you wish. I'm refering to both cases. So far, I've read about the roll given by David Fontana in one of the four sittings done outside Scole where at least one investigator was involved ( 1 in Los Angeles, 1 at San Francisco, and 2 at Ibiza). There are, IIRC, 36 sittings, 16 which have all investigators and the rest only involve MK. From those, I've read about the Dragon Film (done in the Alan Box ), the one about the Poem ( a poem trecable to an acessible source ), the one that ressembled the aceate inking and two or three more, mostly done on Polaroid.

 

[MasterWu]

Okey, so here are some quotes:

This one is from Cornell, in his critique:

"As already mentioned above, some of the behaviour patterns of the lights at Scole resemble effects that can be obtained from LEDs. Experiments undertaken in Cambridge in early 1996 with different configurations of these lights strongly supported this idea. Three SPR members who had been to Scole thought they appeared to be the same and felt similar to the touch in the dark.

 

[MasterWu]

Okey lets see. there were two ruth films, one done in Kodachrome film. There was also a Wie der Staub film, the x-ray film, the dragon film, the dagerre kodachrome film. And that was it, I think. The Dragon Film was done in Alan Box, which Gould apparently showed could easily be open even if closed. In two ocassion (17/11/97 and 22/11/96 sitting ) both the Alan box and the MK box where used in the same Sitting, in one ocassion the Alan Box produced the so-called Daguerre film, and the MK box nothing. In the other ocassion the Alan Box also gave positive results, but I can't find a reference as to what happened in the MK box. The Wie Der Staub film was also produced in the Alan Box. Same for the X-ray film, in both cases ( the Wie der Shaub and the X-ray film) weren't marked. Ruth Film also was done in the Alan Box, no marking involved it seems.

I'm not sure which one was the marked, can you specify Obi?

 

[Obiwan]

Hi MW. The reference I made was from Fontana's summary of the sittings he attended at Scole. He didn't specify which photographs he was referring to when he mentioned sealed canisters with marked film held in the hand of a colleague throughout the session, so I'm afraid I don't know.

I don't know if you have read the report from Fontana or his book. Were the proceedings you refer to Fontana's report or a review of his findings? In any event I don't think it matters which photograph he was referring to in my reference to his book - if we accept that his description of the process in that instance was true and correct. It's a while since I read the Scole report have you read it yourself?

With regard to your knowledge of magic, Fontana reports that a prominent and experienced magician attended at least one session and pronounced the light phenomena as potentially replicable but not without a lot of equipment and highly improbable in the circumstances of the sitting. Reference to it is contained in Fontana's book.

I'm not saying Scole was highly evidential for those not present, or that the controls could not have been improved, but to simply bat-away Fontana's evidence as weak is to reject the evidence of an eye witness to an event that we were not party too. I find Scole curious but not of great interest to me as it doesn't contain much, if any evidence of survival - which is my own area of interest.

It all boils down to the question of Fontana's standing as a witness. As for the SPR, whilst I think it is important to test the controls in place, and to consider where fraud might intrude, it is another thing entirely to conclude that fraud occurred based simply on the fact that there may have been a way to commit it. Since I did not know David Fontana, it is very difficult to assess his evidence, although I'd be inclined to consider him honest and the circumstances, although having the potential for fraud, genuine as he reported it. In other words, one must form a personal view of the testimony of Fontana. That is always something of a subjective process.

I don't think Scole was a satisfying report really, though it is certainly curious.

 

[Sciborg_S_Patel]

Paranthopology has a whole issue devoted to history & science of medium research

In this issue Michael Tymn gives us an insight into the history of survival research, Stanley Krippner introduces us to Brazilian spiritist practices (Candomble, Umbanda and Kardecismo), Jon Mees describes a recent physical mediumship demonstration at Jenny’s Sanctuary, Fabian Graham describes an unusual encounter with mediumship in Singapore, Sara Mackian discusses methods for engaging with the otherworldy, Sophie Louise Drennan explores the sociological aspects of Victorian Spiritualism, Michael Evans gives an insight into his life’s experiences with Spiritualism, Callum E. Cooper discusses the “science and struggle of psi research”, Dr Jochen Soederling gives a detailed phenomenological account of the ectoplasm purportedly being produced by the Felix Experimental Group in Germany, and Kristen Gallerneaux Brooks introduces us to the mediumship investigation equipment on display at the American Society for Psychical Research.

In addition to all of this we have a fascinating feature with contributions from a wide range of mediumship researchers explaining why they feel the investigation of mediumship is a worthy cause that will benefit our understanding of both ourselves as human beings and the world we live in.

And much more besides..."