Is there anything that "Jonathan" (or any other "spirit") says that can be verified and would serve as evidence that he really existed in this earth plane and that the medium wouldn't have known or been able to find out via normal research?
In other words, what convinces you that this is not fraud or delusion?
Not in this interview. That wasn’t what I was going for, although I think it sets a stage when either myself or someone else could do a verification interview. Regarding mediumship in general, there is of course Dr. Julie Beisschel who’s been interviewed on Skeptiko.
I deliberately did not consider the possibility of fraud on Elaine’s part. Maybe more fool me, but I do not think it is likely that a woman would spend years overtly studying mediumship whilst covertly studying to perform a ventriloquist act. Furthermore, we know that people hear voices and experience shifting between different personality alters, so the experience Elaine is reporting is far from unique.
I don’t think delusion is an appropriate category. Let’s say that ‘Jonathan’ arises entirely in Elaine’s subconscious (I do acknowledge this possibility), whilst it may not be quite as interesting as a more literal explanation, the ability to form such a sub personality and have it appear as ‘real’ is still quite a thing. Could we all do this?
It may well be interesting to test Jonathan, but it would require some careful thought. He could be presented with a quiz on life in the 19th century. However, whilst I don’t believe Elaine is secretly an expert on Victorian Britain, obviously I couldn’t learn anything that technically she also could not,
Furthermore, what if Jonathan just said he couldn’t remember things due to being a spirit now? How would we know that isn’t the case?
I’m interested in his ability to ‘look into’ this world. He says he is aware of the historical events that have happened between his passing and now. He is also familiar with cultural references, he told me he knows what a ‘lightsaber’ is. This really opens up more questions than it answers. I asked him if he knew who shot JFK, as a way of asking ‘To what extent do you see world events?’ ‘Is there a limit to the detail?’ Also, if Jonathan understands a lightsaber, does he understand every cultural reference from every film ever? If he can see the Second World War, can he see me insert a picture into an envelope and tell me what the image is?
As I mentioned above, during my session with Jonathan I couldn’t relate to almost anything he said, with the exception that he got my Grandfather’s first name exactly right.