The Evidence that Convinced Two Skeptics There is an Afterlife. Darren McEnaney of Seeking I. Part 2: Episode 8
WTF Just Happened?! the podcast is also available on:
Anchor | Apple | Overcast | YouTube | Spotify | Google | Breaker |Radio Public | Stitcher | Pocket Casts | Castbox
Is there tangible and valid evidence of an afterlife?
Liz and Darren McEnaney of Seeking I continue their talk. Darren is self-described as a “a lay researcher of consciousness focused on anomalous experience and life beyond physical death.” On his podcast,Seeking-i, Darren shares “research into the nature of life, death and whatever comes next.”
Spoon Bending
Liz and Darren pick right up with where they left off last week. Liz continues talking further about how she had bent a spoon with her energy?, not muscle strength. She explains a second spoon-bending event she attended where she was this time unable to bend one, but that ended up giving her even further evidence that spoon bending was genuine. She explains why that is the case.
Liz elaborates that having done this “impossible” thing, spoon bending, that helped prove to her that the laws of the universe are different than we think.
Genuine medium readings versus fake medium readings.
Both Liz and Darren discuss medium readings that they have had and what makes them evidential or not. Liz shares an example of one of the most evidential readings she has had and one of the worst, where it was very clear the medium was phishing for information. Darren also shares about not only readings he has had, but one a friend of his, whose wife is a medium gave. What makes a reading good? How can you assure you know a reading is genuine? Liz and Darren both share how they avoid getting fake readings.
Are skeptics biased?
Darren and Liz both talk about the White Crow theory. All you need is one medium to demonstrate genuine abilities, and that shows that these abilities can exist. The analogy is based on an old quote by William James about the medium Leonora Piper, “All it takes to disprove the assertion that all crows are black is the existence of one white crow.” However, there is a type of skeptic that is not actually skeptical in that they are not examining the evidence. They are determined no matter what to prove there is no afterlife or anything that they would classify as paranormal. Darren gives the analogy that they would claim any white crow had been “painted white.” Darren also shares a story of a skeptical and vocal atheist who once in college, challenged a friend who claimed to have Remote Viewing abilities to test them. This skeptical friend set up a test, and this woman with Remote Viewing abilities gave astoundingly valid evidence. The woman who is now also convinced there is no such thing as anything nonmaterial, now claims what she did never happened. So that is one example where skeptics are biased. Liz and Darren delve further into this, including sharing a story told to Liz by Loyd Auerbach that backs up how our brains see what we already believe no matter the reality. Liz and Darren also share less dramatic, but nevertheless interesting, experiences from their own lives of brains seeing what they already believe regardless of reality.
Another interesting example of this is Harald Walach, PhD, who claimed that doctors did not hear heartbeats until there was actually known evidence that hearts beat and pumped blood. All of this bias of the brain to see what it believes or wants to see, causes Darren to make sure he relies only on empirical evidence in studying afterlife phenomena.
James Randi, known as The Amazing Randi, was a well-known skeptic, (he passed away in 2020) who ran a challenge offering one million dollars to anyone who demonstrated paranormal abilities such as mediumship. No one ever won. Liz and Darren discuss why, and why this challenge and lack of a winner is irrelevant.
Peak in Darien and verified NDEs - Near Death Experiences.
At times NDEs have provided really strong evidence of an afterlife. Darren and Liz discuss some of the most evidential NDEs they have heard of. Darren includes a phenomena referred to as Peak in Darien, where people had NDEs and communicated with people they knew who had died unexpectedly - meaning that during their NDE, the person did not even know the person they were communicating with had died. The NDErs who were revived also provided some amazing evidence by giving information that these deceased people had given to them during their NDE, that theNDEr did not know aside from being told by this deceased person, which later ended up being verified.
Most people misunderstand how mediums get information.
Liz and Darren share what they have learned from mediums about how they get the information from the other side. Most people expect mediums to get their information as if they are having a conversation with our loved ones, but really it is more like playing charades. This misunderstanding can make people dismiss psychic mediums as fake. Liz and Darren give specific examples from medium readings which show how mediums get their information in symbols and how this does not mean the medium is just phishing or cold reading.
An amazing sign from pets who have passed away.
When Liz asks Darren was there a piece of evidence he saw or experienced that blew him away, he says yes. Shortly after two of his dogs passed away he got some remarkable signs and communication that let him know they really were still with him.
Follow Darren: seeking-i.blogspot.com | YouTube | seeking.com
Complete Summary:
Spoon Bending
Liz continues her conversation from last week, where she had been talking about the time she bent a spoon with her mind. She explains that the time she did, was the only time she has ever been able to bend one. What adds to the evidence of spoon bending, is that she went to a spoon bending event once. At the event were a group of people who all were psychic mediums. Liz was the only one who was not. When Liz was unable to bend these spoon, she would hand them over to these women (who were the same size as she is) and these women with psychic abilities were easily able to bend the same spoons she couldn’t. That was very tangible evidence.
Darren confirms that Liz means bending the spoon with her mind or energy, not muscles. Liz confirms and explains exactly what it felt like. Liz also explains that what was amazing was that anyone, herself, this person with no special abilities was able to bend it, and that so many people in the first workshop who did not claim exceptional abilities, also were able to bend them. By doing this impossible thing, that helped show the laws of the universe are different than we think they are.
A white crow, skeptics, and the paranromal.
Another highly evidential thing that Liz has experienced are medium readings. Some were intentionally fake and fraudulent. Some thought they were genuine. Their hearts were in the right place, but they did not get any accurate information. Liz would score the readings, and was honest with herself that many were not good, which she thinks helps show she was not lying to herself. Because of course she wanted them to be real. But a few really did get amazing information.
Darren explains it comes down to the white crow analogy. Which states that all you need is one white crow to show that all crows are not black. One person showing genuine paranormal abilities shows that paranormal abilities are real. But the problem with the debunkers is that let’s say we use the analogy that people have found a few of these white crows in the wild, the debunkers will say someone just went and painted these crows white. Or they put some chemicals on to make these crows white. The debunkers, not even genuine skeptics, will go to any length to insist none of this is true.
Darren then gives an example. A well-known atheist who is also a skeptic, was telling Darren a remote viewing experience, where a friend of this skeptic claimed she could go out of body, or remote view. So the skeptic essentially asked her to prove it. He gave her a test and implemented tricks and controls. She then essentially accomplished it and gave him some remarkable evidence. So the skeptic shared this story with Darren, yet remained vocal that it never was possible. Darren asks the skeptic what he makes of this very tangible experience. The skeptic says that the woman who gave him the strong evidence decided she no longer believes any of this is true, so they no longer believe it happened.
Darren continues how that doesn’t make sense. The skeptic saw it. He knows it did happen. He was even a part of it. So this shows there is a bias. This kind of bias really hurts being able to look empirically at this evidence. But this kind of bias is actually really interesting.
Liz then mentions that there seems to be something in the brain that does not see things that do not fit into their world view. This makes her think even more that a brain seems to be some form of filter of consciousness. She brings up Loyd Auerbach, a parapsychologist and stage magician. Being a stage magician, he knows how fraud could be committed. She shares an amazing experiment Loyd conducted with a group of ardent skeptics that backs up how they do not see anything that would be out of their definition of reality, even when it is under their noses.
Harald Walach, PhD - The Galileo Commission Report.
Darren said this make him think of Harald Walach, PhD. He's a well respected scientist, who wrote The Galileo Commission Report. Dr. Walach had told Darren that before a heart was known to be a pump of blood, it was assumed to be a kind of convection heater of the body. When it came suggested that it could be beating and pumping, when scientists listened to people’s chest to try to hear this pumping they couldn’t hear it. They couldn’t hear the heartbeat. Since they “knew” it was a heater, they could not hear evidence to the contrary. Once there was enough evidence that the heart was actually a pump, suddenly the doctors could hear it. While Darren doesn’t know how true this is, it is a great example of the bias interfering with the facts. Belief must be very strong for the brain to ignore something that is clearly there.
Liz adds that our brains do fill in. That is how magic works. Our brains fill in what isn’t there. For example, the way our eyes work, we don’t actually see the center of things, our brain fills that in.She also noticed editing her book, and even working with a professional editor, they would sometimes miss the ands or buts. When an and or but was supposed to be there and wasn’t, sometimes their brains filled it in.
Darren was watching a channel he likes called Game Grumps, they are these funny guys who play and comment on video games. They were playing a game with subtitles written in broken English, and as they read the subtitles aloud, they automatically filled in the ands and buts. Their brains are filling it in to make sense. If you do that so easily in a game, how many more everyday life situations do you find that your brain does that, without you noticing the the errors are there.
Your brain does this not only with words, but can also fill-in meaning where there is none. For example, people who have lost someone will post a photo and see paranormal things going on in it and say the ghost of their loved one is in it. Subconsciously, they see it because they want something to be there. It is easy to deceive yourself and t's so important that you recognize when the possibility of self deception comes up. This is why he always makes sure to look at the empirical aspects of the phenomenon rather than the subjective ones.
Peak in Darien
Darren then mentions the Peak in Darien, Darien he thinks means a place beyond normal perception. People can peer into it to see things happen in the future. He thinks it comes from the Bible, but he has never really read the Bible. Essentially though Peak in Darien when someone accesses a transcendental realm often during NDE’s or death bed visions and they sees someone there who has died, but this person just died and people do not know this person has died. The person with the NDE then tells people this person has died, and no one thinks they are accurate at first. He gives an example of a case where this happened where someone who had an NDE saw their college age sister who no-one knew had passed. Darren gives another example of someone getting empirical verifiable information from either their dad who had passed away. The father told them something neither they nor their mom knew, which ended up being proven true. So for Darren it’s things like this that make him think there is an afterlife. So these Peak in Darien experiences give concrete evidence. These would be impossible to occur if there was no consciousness after death.
But so many people do not believe this really happened or is true. But they will say they don’t believe any of this and still share with Darren one or two inexplicable things that have happened to them. Darren explains he thinks there's a misconception among the majority of people that if this is true, this is how it's supposed to work and it's supposed to work as if you're communicating with the material world.
Mediums get symbols.
Liz shares that many people say that if you are talking to mediums why don’t they all hear her dad say “Hi my name is…, my birthday is this. Our favorite memory is this.” But they are expecting him to be able to communicate as if he has a voice box and body. They are holding communication to a material standard. But it doesn’t need to be that perfect to think that something is going on. And that is a hinderance to this research is people are holding material world standards to the phenomena and then are incapable of seeing that something still inexplicable is going on. You can admit that something inexplicable going on and still not have a definitive answer as to what is occurring.
Darren shares some of what he heard such as if “heaven” exists, there wouldn’t be space for all the humans and animals, but they are assuming space works the same way there that it does here. And other people have said they wouldn’t want to live forever in the afterlife realm. Darren lets them know that he would agree if time exists in the same way there. But from what he has heard, time is different there. And this all shows how so many people unconsciously make their decisions about this stuff and their assumptions.
Darren then shares about a medium he interviewed for Seeking i and had done reading for him. She described how the process of mediumship works. This medium shared that she sees things (clairvoyant), although how it works is different for different mediums. She also does hear a few things, but the spirits come through to her with symbols. These symbols represent what the spirit wants her to communicate and she has to interpret these symbols.
Darren did a video on Seeking i recently where he gave his thoughts on some of John Edward’s and a few other medium readings. A problem he realizes is that people equate a medium having any misses with fraud or bad guesses. But another possibility, which John Edwards himself said too, is that they are interpreting the symbols they receive. HE shares a specific example where John Edward saw outer space. But what could that mean? That cold relate to how the person died, that they liked Star Trek or Star Wars, they have gone on a recreation flight up to space. And this could seem like phishing too. And at times it could be tool. But it depends on the medium.
Some mediums are fake
Liz shares that she has had both kinds of readings and says she will give an example of both phishing versus a medium trying to figure out a symbol. Her first medium reading was excellent, and she later learned getting to know mediums, that this woman is an excellent and thinly regarded medium. Liz shares a specific example of how this woman was misinterpreting a symbol, as a date, but when they figured out what it was, it was truly amazing evidence that she was genuinely communicating with Liz’s dad. This medium kept getting further evidence, such as stuff about Liz’s dad’s personality that backed up she was genuine. Then during her worst medium reading, it was very different. There were a few who didn’t get good information but were still genuine hearted.These ones offered her money back. Some might have been more spiritual minded than Liz and were maybe not that skilled, and didn’t give the level of evidence she wanted, but their hearts were in the right place.
But then there was the frauds. There was one really obvious fraudulent reading Liz had where the woman phished the whole time. Liz shares some examples from this reading and how this woman kept throwing out information and trying to get Liz to narrow it down for her. This medium was getting very frustrated that Liz would not do that.
Darren shares a reading he had that was also not evidential. He couldn’t be sure if this woman was fake or just not evidential. HE shares they very general information this woman gave, and why he was not impressed. Darren explains that he wouldn't say it was strong enough evidence to prove that she was fake, but he would say that it just wasn't evidence to show that she was genuine.
Make sure a medium can’t cheat.
Darren explains that that’s a problem when some people jump to a medium being a fraud too quickly. There is a difference between a medium proving they are a fraud versus not proving that they are genuine. That is a problem with James Randi - The Amazing Randi, who held a one million dollar challenge for mediums to show they had any genuine abilities. James Randi did do some amazing things and really did expose some frauds. But he applied being fake to all mediums. Then he took every mess-up as evidence to show they were fake. He would never be satisfied though.
Now mediums can know so much more though through normal mean with social media. IT is important to not give mediums information and to give a fake name. Also Darren is studying psychology and has been learning how most communication is not even vocal. It’s facial expressions and body language. But when you go into a medium reading, go in with genuine skepticism not to debunk. He is just going in to investigate. But you can’t give information and be aware of how your face is. YOU want to make it as scientific and empirical as possible. The hakes are good at what to look for.
Liz explains she uses a google voice number and phone readings where they can’t read your face. Answer only yes, nor I don’t know. Cheaters and cold-readers do not know what to do with any of that. And some might have been unintentional cold-readers who genuinely thought they were getting information. But there were still some that got really accurate information and blew her away. Even with all these precautions they knew specifics.
Signs from the other side.
Darren shares a story from someone he interviewed who is an induced after-death communication therapist, which is a whole other topic.This man’s wife is a medium and she one day gave all this information about a distant relative of this man that this man hardly knew. Then Darren wonders why so many mediums are women. So many more than men. He thinks it might be that woman are more in tune biologically with emotion and are more intuitive. Liz thinks it is more likely sociological. Liz would like to compare to other cultures where intuition and psychic abilities are more widely accepted, if that is actually true.
Liz then asks Darren was there a major what the fuck, highly evidential experience he had. Darren then shares some remarkable signs he got after both of his dogs passed away. The signs were strong enough that even his parents were impressed.
James Randi and the million dollar prize.
Liz then takes the conversation back to James Randi. Early on, he was a part of why she kept thinking this was all impossible. Why does Darren think no one ever won the minion dollar challenge.
Darren explains that he has looked into the challenge. One issue is that you have to sign all your rights over to James Randi if you participate whether or not you pass. Also the way the challenges are set up. Also a few people, Darren can’t remember exactly who, met Randi and he was showing some pretty unethical practices. But Randi does deserve credit for exposure of some of the fakes. However, he does not take a real scientific approach to the challenge. There is a great book called Randi’s Prize that goes into all of this. And the professionals such as Loyd Auerbach and Stanley Krippner don’t regard Randi’s challenge as properly able to assess if psychic phenomena is genuine.
Windbridge Institute, for example, which studies and researches mediums always considers it very important to work with mediums in the conditions they are capable of working in. That of course doesn’t mean allow them to cheat. If they said for example, that they could only work with an internet connection and a first and last name that would be ridiculous. They have to still eliminate the ways mediums could commit fraud or do a cold reading. Randi refuses to work with how mediums abilities actually work.
Liz adds that also readings are never flawless and these abilities aren't flawless. Randi isn’t working with the odds against chance. If you make one mistake, you don’t pass. We of course wish mediums abilities were that flawless, but they aren’t. As mediums have said it's more like playing charades than having a conversation with a physical person. It’s inter-dimensional communication. How can that be flawless. Talking to someone on a cell phone isn't always flawless. Sitting face to face with the person, in the same dimension, in bodies, in the same room, you sometimes miss-hear one another and misinterpret. That’s why you have to score with a percent. If they get my dad’s name, or favorite memory, what he did for work, my uncle, my grandfather's work, and then they say something completely wrong like that my mom has passed, that is still really amazing. They still showed they know things that they are incapable of knowing.
Darren then thanks Liz for having him on and lets everyone know where they can find him.