When the spirit of my uncle manifested himself in the presence of a highly respected clairvoyant; when he obviously communicated silently with the clairvoyant (with the latter telling me what my uncle said); when my uncle responded, through the clairvoyant, to something I had said to the clairvoyant; I realised that my uncle had retained his mind and his memory of matters which had occurred while he was alive, as well as knowing certain events if great importance to me which had occurred after his demise. How could he do this without a body of substance, and the brain which is part of that body?
The following extracts are from ‘The conscious universe: the scientific truth of psychic phenomena’ by Dean Radin (taken from the Internet)
“The idea is that those compelling, perplexing and sometimes profound human experiences known as “psychic phenomena” are real. This will come as no surprise to most of the world’s population, because the majority already believes in psychic phenomena. But over the past few years, something new has propelled us beyond old debates over personal beliefs. The reality of psychic phenomena is now no longer based solely upon faith, or wishful thinking, or absorbing anecdotes. It is not even based upon the results of a few scientific experiments. Instead, we know that these phenomena exist because of new ways of evaluating massive amounts of scientific evidence collected over a century by scores of researchers.
Psychic, or “psi” phenomena fall into two general categories. The first is perception of objects or events beyond the range of the ordinary senses. The second is mentally causing action at a distance. In both categories, it seems that intention, the mind’s will, can do things that – according to prevailing scientific theories – it isn’t supposed to be able to do. We wish to know what is happening to loved ones, and somehow, sometimes, that information is available even over large distances. We wish to speed the recovery of a loved one’s illness, and somehow they get better quicker, even at a distance. Mind willing, many interesting things appear to be possible.
Understanding such experiences requires an expanded view of human consciousness. Is the mind merely a mechanistic, information-processing bundle of neurons? Is it a “computer made of meat” as some cognitive scientists and neuroscientists believe? Or is it something more? The evidence suggests that while many aspects of mental functioning are undoubtedly related to brain structure and electrochemical activity, there is also something else happening, something very interesting.”
(Comment: Of course there is. It is quite easy to be sceptical when denied any real-time experience. Then it is all a matter of ‘Where’s the evidence?’ especially when such experiences are beyond the scope of the scientific method as know it. )
RAJA ARASA RATNAM 