Speaker 1: And you're here.
Speaker 2: Thanks for choosing the iHeartRadio and Coast to Ghost Day
Speaker 2: and Paranormal Podcast Network. Your quest for podcasts of the paranormal, supernatural,
Speaker 2: and the unexplained ends here. We invite you to enjoy
Speaker 2: all our shows we have on this network, and right now,
Speaker 2: let's start with Chase of the Afterlife for the Sandra.
Speaker 3: Champlain Welcome to our podcast. Please be aware the thoughts
Speaker 3: and opinions expressed by the host are their thoughts and
Speaker 3: opinions only and do not reflect those of iHeartMedia, iHeartRadio,
Speaker 3: Coast to Coast am employees of Premiere Networks, or their
Speaker 3: sponsors and associates. We would like to encourage you to
Speaker 3: do your own research and discover the subject matter for yourself. Hi,
Speaker 3: I'm Sandra Champlain. For over twenty five years, been on
Speaker 3: a journey to prove the existence of life after death.
Speaker 3: On each episode, we'll discuss the reasons we now know
Speaker 3: that our loved ones have survived physical death and so
Speaker 3: will we. Welcome to Shades of the Afterlife. Back in
Speaker 3: two thousand and five, I attended a conference in Atlanta,
Speaker 3: Georgia called Afterlife the Evidence. It was hosted by Tom
Speaker 3: and Lisa Butler, who wrote the book There Is No
Speaker 3: Death and There Are No Dead. That was the very
Speaker 3: first time I had ever heard about Sonia Ronaldi. You
Speaker 3: may remember her from episode number one. She was my
Speaker 3: very first guest on Shades of the Afterlife. But I
Speaker 3: heard she was in Brazil doing these phone calls to
Speaker 3: the dead, recording empty space while talking to a parent,
Speaker 3: and when she played back the recording, the voice of
Speaker 3: their deceased child would be there. Now, so many years later,
Speaker 3: she not only receives voices but also images. You may
Speaker 3: be interested in our upcoming event with Sonia. She'll be
Speaker 3: sharing with us her most recent experiments. You want to
Speaker 3: check out We Don't Die dot com and the store page.
Speaker 3: By the time you hear this, it might have already passed,
Speaker 3: but you can certainly watch the replay. The other person
Speaker 3: quite memorable to me was doctor Gary Schwartz. He did
Speaker 3: a fantastic presentation about some of the double blind and
Speaker 3: triple blind experiments he did with mediums. Let me tell
Speaker 3: you about him. Doctor Gary Schwartz is a former Harvard
Speaker 3: and Yale professor. He is now senior professor at the
Speaker 3: University of Arizona in psychology, medicine, neurology, and psychiatry. In
Speaker 3: addition to teaching courses, he directs research at the Laboratory
Speaker 3: for advance in Consciousness and Health. Doctor Schwartz has published
Speaker 3: more than five hundred scientific papers. He served as the
Speaker 3: founding president of the Academy for the Advancement of Post
Speaker 3: Material Sciences. Seven of his nearly two dozen books written
Speaker 3: include The Living Energy Universe, The Afterlife Experiments, The Healing
Speaker 3: Energy Experiments, The Truth About Medium, The Sacred Promise, An
Speaker 3: Atheist in Heaven, and Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence. And
Speaker 3: these books I mentioned are all related to his scientific
Speaker 3: investigations and findings addressing the survival of life after death.
Speaker 3: He frequently speaks about health and psychology, healing energy, survival
Speaker 3: of consciousness, and so much more. Has been featured on
Speaker 3: some very prominent television and radio shows and the big
Speaker 3: newspapers like The London Times, The New York Times, the
Speaker 3: LA Times and others. Doctor Gary Schwartz is married to
Speaker 3: a medium, the beautiful Ronda, who I had an opportunity
Speaker 3: to meet both of them back in twenty eighteen. I
Speaker 3: think it was with our friends from the Afterlife Research
Speaker 3: and Education Institute Doctor Schwartz is also one of the
Speaker 3: people behind the Soul Phone. You may remember that we
Speaker 3: talked to doctor Mark pittstick Back on episode twenty five.
Speaker 3: These words come to us from the International Spiritualist Federation
Speaker 3: and it's a good group to keep an eye on.
Speaker 3: You can find their website at THEISF dot co dot
Speaker 3: uk and they've just started a YouTube channel with several
Speaker 3: interesting videos. You can find them on YouTube at ISSF
Speaker 3: Science Forum, and of course doctor Gary Schwartz can be
Speaker 3: found at the Soul Phone Foundation dot org. I am
Speaker 3: currently reading doctor Schwartz's book, The Afterlife Experiments, which will
Speaker 3: give you a much deeper view, but I want to
Speaker 3: share these words with you. It is very rare to
Speaker 3: hear doctor Schwartz, and on this episode he speaks about
Speaker 3: the soul Phone, about consciousness, survival, about mediums and more so.
Speaker 3: Here is the incredible doctor Gary Schwartz.
Speaker 4: I began doing research on the question of mediumship probably
Speaker 4: more than twenty five years ago, which is quite extraordinary
Speaker 4: when I think about it. And the research began in
Speaker 4: secret because it was research that I was not doing
Speaker 4: because I have been a spiritualist, or was even open
Speaker 4: to these ideas. Just as a sidebar, you know, I
Speaker 4: have been trained in Western science, I've been read used
Speaker 4: in essentially an atheist home. I was taught that it
Speaker 4: was ashes dust to dust, chase closed, and I just
Speaker 4: assumed that that was true. And it wasn't until I
Speaker 4: was during my time as a professor of psychology and
Speaker 4: psychiatry at Yale University that I began to question all
Speaker 4: that and literally stumbled upon a theory and developed the
Speaker 4: theory which, among other things, forced me to predict that
Speaker 4: not only was a life after death possible, but was
Speaker 4: sort of required by our understanding of contemporary of physics
Speaker 4: and system science. But that didn't mean I was going
Speaker 4: to do research in that area. It was just, you know,
Speaker 4: a theory. There was nothing compelling me to do it.
Speaker 4: But then I had a series of experiences, actually mostly
Speaker 4: with women who had lost loved ones and really wanted
Speaker 4: to know whether their loved ones personality conscioussiness histories continued.
Speaker 4: These women were they came from different walks of life.
Speaker 4: Some were scientists, some were writers, some were just regular people.
Speaker 4: But they each approached me and beseeched me to help them,
Speaker 4: help give them evidence. And so what I say to
Speaker 4: people is that I was pushed there by scientific theory
Speaker 4: and evidence, but I was pulled there by love, Linda's
Speaker 4: love for her father, Susie's love for her mother. And
Speaker 4: when you pushed and pulled in the same direction, it's
Speaker 4: very hard to resist. So I'm sharing it with you
Speaker 4: because when I began doing this work, not only did
Speaker 4: I begin doing it in secret, but also I did
Speaker 4: it with no knowledge of the history of the field.
Speaker 4: I didn't know about s Rotha Conan Doyle and Harry Udiny.
Speaker 4: I didn't know about the early work in British Parapsychological
Speaker 4: Association or William James. I didn't know about any of
Speaker 4: the spiritualism movements and so on. And I didn't know
Speaker 4: also about other emerging literatures such as Near to That
Speaker 4: about the experiences or reincarnation. This was not part of
Speaker 4: my education, it was not part of my upbringing, and
Speaker 4: so I approached it the childlike heart and interest, open minded.
Speaker 4: But with all this background in science and experimental design
Speaker 4: and statistics and how to analyze data, and what happened
Speaker 4: was I was privileged to end up meeting some very
Speaker 4: gifted mediums who were really interested in science, and they
Speaker 4: considered themselves to be evidential mediums, and they wanted the
Speaker 4: world to know that they weren't frauds, that they weren't
Speaker 4: cold readers, that there was a real phenomena here. And
Speaker 4: I put them through ever more sophisticated experimental tests, and
Speaker 4: in every case the mediums who were real quote passed
Speaker 4: those tests, to the point where my first book was
Speaker 4: published in two thousand and two, which is twenty one
Speaker 4: years ago, which called the Afterlife Experiments break Through side
Speaker 4: to its for Life after Death. And I was in
Speaker 4: awe of not only their gifts, but in awe of
Speaker 4: a greater spiritual reality that I had no idea existed,
Speaker 4: and that the amount of love and caring that connected
Speaker 4: these both within and between these realms. Now, over the years,
Speaker 4: the research became ever more sophisticated. We ended up doing
Speaker 4: what it called single blind studies, and then double blind studies,
Speaker 4: and then triple blind studies. And a postdoctoral fellow who
Speaker 4: worked with me, who then created a instrument institute called
Speaker 4: doctor Julie Bischel. She went on and even conducted five
Speaker 4: way blinded experiments. Scientists would get obsessed about experimental controls,
Speaker 4: particularly in controversial areas, and it became really clear that
Speaker 4: the conventional explanations could not account for this, and I
Speaker 4: reached the point where I didn't need any more scientific
Speaker 4: quote evidence to be convinced of it myself, nor did
Speaker 4: I feel that scientific evidence in that one area by
Speaker 4: itself would ultimately be convincing to the people who were
Speaker 4: extremely skeptical or the quote disbelievers. So I began to
Speaker 4: shift my focus to research on technology. I went public
Speaker 4: with that work, that meaning in terms of publishing a
Speaker 4: couple of key scientific papers in twenty ten, in two
Speaker 4: and eleven on the use of super sensitive state of
Speaker 4: the art technology to detect the energy of spirit, the
Speaker 4: presence of the info energy systems that comprise our quote
Speaker 4: energy bodies, and so on. And I did that work
Speaker 4: always in collaboration with gifted mediums, and so that's the
Speaker 4: kind of work that I've focused on, and I have
Speaker 4: left the continued development of mediumship research to others. The
Speaker 4: one thing I can say, though, is that I've maintained
Speaker 4: relationships and particularly private research relationships with special mediums, and
Speaker 4: they in turn have written books about research that they've
Speaker 4: done with me through their practices and the like. I
Speaker 4: can honestly say I have witnessed hundreds and hundreds of
Speaker 4: research readings in a laboratory setting over the past quarter
Speaker 4: of a century, and I have witnessed probably thousands that
Speaker 4: were just more quote informal, and after all that time,
Speaker 4: I'm always struck with awe and wonder and gratitude and
Speaker 4: celebration for both the phenomena, including its mysteries. There are,
Speaker 4: I mean, there are a lot of mysteries, as you know,
Speaker 4: and the mysteries and the challenges, the difficulties that most
Speaker 4: mediums have, even the very best a what's the word,
Speaker 4: The more intellectual and spiritual questions about all of us
Speaker 4: are really in some real spooks, you know, more interesting
Speaker 4: than just knowing that it's real.
Speaker 3: It's nice hearing his words, isn't it, Professor Gary Schwartz. Yes,
Speaker 3: it is. We're going to take our first break and
Speaker 3: then we'll be back with doctor Schwartz. So just stay tuned,
Speaker 3: stay just where you are. You're listening to Shades of
Speaker 3: the Afterlife on the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast AM
Speaker 3: Paranormal podcast Network.
Speaker 1: Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 5: There's more Shades of the Afterlife coming right up.
Speaker 6: Hey, folks, we need your music, Hey, it's producer Tom
Speaker 6: at Coast to Coast AM and every first Sunday of
Speaker 6: the month, we play music from emerging artists just like you.
Speaker 6: If you're a musician or a singer and have recorded
Speaker 6: music you'd like to submit, it's very easy. Just go
Speaker 6: to Coast tocoastam dot com, click the Emerging Artists banner
Speaker 6: in the carousel, follow the instructions and we just might
Speaker 6: play your music on the air. Go now to Coast
Speaker 6: tocoastam dot com to send us your recording. That's Coast
Speaker 6: to coastam dot com.
Speaker 5: Hey, it's not your sky and you're listening to the
Speaker 5: iHeart Radio and Coast to Coast AM Paranormal Podcast Network.
Speaker 3: Welcome back to Shades of the Afterlife. I'm Sandra Champlain.
Speaker 3: We're listening to some words from doctor Gary Schwartz. He'll
Speaker 3: be talking a bit about the big picture of research
Speaker 3: into the afterlife, and towards the end, a bit about
Speaker 3: what he calls the technology, which is his soul Phone project.
Speaker 3: Let's listen.
Speaker 4: So let's first talk about the very big picture. The
Speaker 4: very big picture is that the kind of research that
Speaker 4: points to ile of conscience. Let's just talk about the
Speaker 4: existence of a greater spiritual reality. And let's ignore, for example,
Speaker 4: theories from physics that point in that direction. Let's talk
Speaker 4: about data. There are many categories of data, each of
Speaker 4: which speak to life after death, and they have been
Speaker 4: discussed in many books, you know, and the latest you're
Speaker 4: probably aware of the Bigelow Institute for Conscious Studies and
Speaker 4: their contests that they had and so on. And there
Speaker 4: are these bodies of work and the major ones or
Speaker 4: near death experiences. There's after death communications, there's reincarnation in children,
Speaker 4: there's deathbed visions, there's mediumship research, and the latest, of course,
Speaker 4: is the technology research. Each of those bodies of evidence
Speaker 4: have very compelling data. No one of those areas by
Speaker 4: itself is quote proof, although the one that would become
Speaker 4: the closest to providing proof is actually the technology for
Speaker 4: the reason that I'll explain, but it has not reached
Speaker 4: that level that you'd call proof level. But each of
Speaker 4: these individual level areas by themselves are not quote definitive.
Speaker 4: But when you put them all together, the convergence of
Speaker 4: the evidence, the consilience of the evidence, the whole is
Speaker 4: far greater than the sum of its parts. And there
Speaker 4: is no other alternative explanation that it can account for
Speaker 4: all of that evidence when you have a body of
Speaker 4: evidence where all of the evidence points in that direction.
Speaker 4: And the conclusion that I say is the single best
Speaker 4: theory that accounts for the largest amount of the evidence
Speaker 4: and also proposes hypotheses and experiments that could be proved
Speaker 4: or disproved in future research. That anothesis is the survival
Speaker 4: of consciousness to hypothesis, And it's very easy to come
Speaker 4: to the conclusion if you know all the evidence now
Speaker 4: within all that area, then there's this we go to
Speaker 4: the specific domains. Mediumship within that as one of those
Speaker 4: categories is one that is quite strong. And what's interesting
Speaker 4: about mediumship compared to the others is that it can
Speaker 4: be quote brought into the laboratory. Right now, we don't
Speaker 4: do you know, near death experience research where we intentionally
Speaker 4: quote kill people or you know, and then study them.
Speaker 4: But during these periods of tide, they're very ethical reasons
Speaker 4: for not doing that, okay, but mediumship research you can
Speaker 4: bring into the laboratory. Mediums can be brought in. They
Speaker 4: can do this under controlled circumstances and the meta what
Speaker 4: are called meta analyzes, where they've looked at put the
Speaker 4: various studies together, there is a debate about which studies
Speaker 4: you include in which studies you don't include, which is
Speaker 4: always the case with meta analysis. But again the beta
Speaker 4: analysis also in general support that same conclusion, even when
Speaker 4: you limit it to the very best studies. The better
Speaker 4: the studies are, the clearer the conclusions are. So the
Speaker 4: mediumship research, again, if you know the research, it's hard
Speaker 4: to come to a different conclusion. Also, and this is
Speaker 4: where sophistication in the research area becomes important. So, for example,
Speaker 4: there are conditions which are optimal for obtaining positive results.
Speaker 4: So if you want to achieve positive results, you want
Speaker 4: to have skilled mediums who are evidence oriented, who are
Speaker 4: minimally stressed and can get into a state where they
Speaker 4: can feel comfortable receiving information and not worrying about whether
Speaker 4: it's correct or not and not trying to quote charge.
Speaker 4: You also need to be able to have sitters for
Speaker 4: whom loved ones as a strong emotional bond and a
Speaker 4: reason for them to connect in this context. And thirdly,
Speaker 4: you want to be able to design the research in
Speaker 4: such a way that it as closely as possible reflects
Speaker 4: what mediums really do. In order to be able to
Speaker 4: perceive the information that they get because science has very
Speaker 4: often designed these very naive kinds of experiments trying to
Speaker 4: be quote controlling, and they don't realize they're throwing out
Speaker 4: the baby with the bath water. And I wrote about
Speaker 4: that in two thousand and two. So you know, if
Speaker 4: you know these areas of work, and you're sophisticated at all,
Speaker 4: you realize that, yeah, it's very easy to not get
Speaker 4: a positive result and then say therefore, quote there's no
Speaker 4: phenomena because you didn't get it under your circumstances. One
Speaker 4: of the things, by the way, sidebar, that I have
Speaker 4: been very impressed with is how easy it and how
Speaker 4: fragile mediumship is with the very best well Michael Jordan's
Speaker 4: of the mediumship world Michael Jordan was a basketball player,
Speaker 4: or now the Lebron James and the Stepth Curryes of basketball.
Speaker 4: How easy it is to have the very best medium's
Speaker 4: performance de deteriorate, if not be completely impaired. I can
Speaker 4: design very simple experiments and under circumstances with the very
Speaker 4: best mediums that I were, and I know they're Michael Jordan's,
Speaker 4: but they can't do the task. It's like saying Okay,
Speaker 4: we want you to see whether you get the balls
Speaker 4: in the basket, but you have to do it wearing blindfolds. Well,
Speaker 4: most people that are free throw lined, you know, if
Speaker 4: they put a blindfold on, they're going to miss most
Speaker 4: of their shots, even if they know where the basket is.
Speaker 4: I mean, there are just certain things that you can
Speaker 4: do that interferes with performance. But if you don't know
Speaker 4: what it is that is not optimal but is actually interfering,
Speaker 4: you can have the phenomena disappear. Again, the sophistication is
Speaker 4: a factor, and again some of that. There's been an
Speaker 4: article written recently and I'm forgetting his name. I see it,
Speaker 4: but I can't say it. You Brazilian scientists, but they've
Speaker 4: written a methodological analysis of the optimal conditions to obtain mediums,
Speaker 4: not from just a control removing fraud or removing you
Speaker 4: making vague general statements, but optimizing the conditions forgetting a
Speaker 4: positive result as opposed to. The third area is in
Speaker 4: the technology, and the technology area, which is one that
Speaker 4: I've been focusing on for the past ten years, I'd
Speaker 4: like to draw the distinction between proof of concept and
Speaker 4: proof of product. Proof of practicality as opposed to proof
Speaker 4: of possibility. So there's a proof of possibility versus a
Speaker 4: proof of practicality. When you look at the totality of
Speaker 4: the data that we've collected, much of which is still
Speaker 4: not published, partly because of issues of intellectual property in
Speaker 4: the business world, part of women about the ethics of
Speaker 4: all this work, and also potential abuse. But when you
Speaker 4: look at the totality of the data, there is no
Speaker 4: question that we have achieved in our research proof of concept.
Speaker 4: But we've even developed a paradigm for being able to
Speaker 4: do multi centered, double blind experiments replicating the very things
Speaker 4: that we have done in the lab quote over and over,
Speaker 4: and there's no question that we get a real phenomenon.
Speaker 4: And the metaphor that I use is like a Right
Speaker 4: Brothers moment in the history of flight. Prior to the
Speaker 4: Right Brothers in the early twentieth entry, there were no
Speaker 4: powered airplanes, and nobody knew whether it was possible to
Speaker 4: have flight, and many people had tried and failed, in
Speaker 4: fact died. But then on that one fateful day in
Speaker 4: Kitty Hawk, five people witnessed this wooden and paper and
Speaker 4: cloth plane take off. It had no windows, it had
Speaker 4: no chairs, there were no stewardess. I mean, there was
Speaker 4: nothing that we just take for granted for flight today.
Speaker 4: I think the first flight lasted. I've done all of
Speaker 4: fourteen seconds or whatever. I don't remember the details of it,
Speaker 4: and then the plane finally crashed. It was completely impractical,
Speaker 4: but we knew the flight was possible, and that by
Speaker 4: the way, the second time that when they tried to
Speaker 4: do it, the wind wasn't strong enough in the plane
Speaker 4: graft that they had to build it again, and the
Speaker 4: third time become so on. But once you know it
Speaker 4: was possible, then it became an engineering challenge to go
Speaker 4: from proof of possible to proof of practical. So we've
Speaker 4: been spending the past particuli ot wo say, four years
Speaker 4: now on trying to see whether we can We call
Speaker 4: it tunnel emergence. So we're in the tunnel and we
Speaker 4: can see the end of the tunnel. We're seeing light
Speaker 4: at the end of the tunnel, but we have not
Speaker 4: arrived through the tunnel. And the issue is primarily one
Speaker 4: of an issue of signal to noise because the amount
Speaker 4: of the intensity of quote physical energy, be it femto amp,
Speaker 4: changes in current flow or the behavior of single photons
Speaker 4: of light in a pitch black environment. We now have
Speaker 4: the technology to be able to measure these ultra tiny changes,
Speaker 4: and we have the statistics and the paradigm to be
Speaker 4: able to using techniques both from astrophysics and also in
Speaker 4: EG recording what's called the evoke potentials, you can do
Speaker 4: some very clever things and decrease the signal to noise Rachio.
Speaker 4: The problem is, as you get higher and higher sensitivities,
Speaker 4: you also pick up unanticipated noise problems which have been
Speaker 4: the what's the word the achilles heel almost of this work,
Speaker 4: and maybe that's not quite the right phrase. So let
Speaker 4: me give you an example. We were doing research detecting
Speaker 4: the capacity for our hypothesized spirit collaborators, and we call
Speaker 4: them probably heard of the term post material psychology and
Speaker 4: postal scientier. We refer to them as PMPs or post
Speaker 4: material persons or post material participants. We effectually refer to
Speaker 4: them as the A team and we're the BT because
Speaker 4: they do a lot more about what the other side
Speaker 4: is like there we do, and that includes very distinguished scientists.
Speaker 4: And we were studying the capacity to see whether or
Speaker 4: not we could detect subtle shifts in the absorption and
Speaker 4: reflection of light passing through a pmp's hand, because you
Speaker 4: know quote spirit of PMPs can if you're fully formed.
Speaker 4: That's why certain mediums who can see can see spirit.
Speaker 4: They see a body, they see jewelry, they see clothing,
Speaker 4: thefcy hair. It's all you know there, and they can
Speaker 4: engage in tasks just like we can.
Speaker 3: It's time to take a quick break, but we'll be
Speaker 3: right back. You're listening to Shades of the Afterlife on
Speaker 3: the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast AM Paranormal podcast Network.
Speaker 1: Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 2: There's more Shades of the Afterlife coming right up.
Speaker 7: Were you looking for that certain someone who shares your
Speaker 7: interests in UFOs, ghosts, bigfoot, conspiracy theories, and the paranormal, Well,
Speaker 7: look no further. Paranormal date dot com the unique site
Speaker 7: for like minded people. If you like the senior crowd,
Speaker 7: try paranormal date dot com slash seniors to meet like
Speaker 7: minded people that are sixty plus. It all depends on
Speaker 7: what you prefer. Paranormal date dot Com is great for everyone.
Speaker 7: You can also tap into members that are sixty plus
Speaker 7: at Paranormal date dot Com slash Seniors enjoy your search
Speaker 7: and have some fun at paranormal date dot com.
Speaker 4: The best afterlife information you can get.
Speaker 6: Well, you're a loud Shades of the Afterlife with Sandra Champlain.
Speaker 3: Welcome back to Shades of the Afterlife. I'm Sandra Champlain
Speaker 3: and we're listening to doctor Gary Schwartz talk about the
Speaker 3: latest experiments what's called the soul Phone project that they're
Speaker 3: working on. How PMPs stands for post material people, how
Speaker 3: they can block or interfere with a ray of light,
Speaker 3: making their presence known under laboratory conditions.
Speaker 4: And just in the same way that we obviously block
Speaker 4: a beam of light, in principle, they should be able
Speaker 4: to not block that. They should be able to subtly
Speaker 4: alter the behavior of light passing through them under controlled circumstances.
Speaker 4: And we developed super sensitive technology using optical tables in
Speaker 4: the whole nine yards and multi reflecting mirrors so we
Speaker 4: could pass the light back and forth through the hand
Speaker 4: over and over again, so you could accumulate the effects.
Speaker 4: And we did very creative things, and we built this
Speaker 4: piece of apparatus and then we couldn't use it. You
Speaker 4: know why, Well, first of all, any kind of vibration,
Speaker 4: any car in that drive way or a block away
Speaker 4: would produce bigger effects than them. But secondly, we couldn't
Speaker 4: calibrate the mirrors because the system was so sensitive. We're
Speaker 4: using micrometer mirrors. The problem was that our body heat
Speaker 4: walking up to the equipment, and so we didn't have
Speaker 4: Unless you've got a completely environmentally controlled situation and you've
Speaker 4: got the technology to be able to control them remotely
Speaker 4: where you're not imposing heat like this, you're immediately producing
Speaker 4: confounding variables. That takes a lot of money. So there's
Speaker 4: been a challenge of it's not that we don't have
Speaker 4: the technology to be able to develop this kind of
Speaker 4: precision and measurement. It's that we don't have the resources
Speaker 4: now to implement it. And most people who have money
Speaker 4: don't see what it would mean. They don't recognize what
Speaker 4: it would mean if it was really possible to produce
Speaker 4: for the lay public. We call the soul switch a
Speaker 4: binary switch. That would be the equivalent of a keystroke,
Speaker 4: because if you could go from proof of concept to
Speaker 4: proof of practical and what do I mean by proof
Speaker 4: of practical where when our PMP makes a response within
Speaker 4: a finite period of time, we could be ninety nine
Speaker 4: percent sure that it was them and not an artifact.
Speaker 4: And if you can do it for one switch, then
Speaker 4: you could do it for forty switches. If you could
Speaker 4: do it for forty switches, you have a keyboard, if
Speaker 4: you have soul texting, you've now got direct communications.
Speaker 8: Just I would communicate by email and text all the time,
Speaker 8: and for the first time ever, real communication becomes possible.
Speaker 8: The issue is not technological, and the issue is not conceptual.
Speaker 8: It's ultimately engineering practical. And if you don't have the
Speaker 8: resources to create we ate the code, clean rooms and
Speaker 8: to have the people who have the expertise in the
Speaker 8: various components working collaboratively as a team, you can't make
Speaker 8: that quote breakthrough. So what's happened is that we've gone
Speaker 8: from where it would take us ten or twelve hours
Speaker 8: of data collection and analysis to where we can now
Speaker 8: probably within five minutes, get an average single response that
Speaker 8: is statistically significant. Now, that's a huge increase in time
Speaker 8: and practicality. But if you have to wait five seconds.
Speaker 4: For keypress and then you're not one hundred percent it's
Speaker 4: statistically true, but it's not ninety nine percent true, then
Speaker 4: it's not a practical communication device. So we're getting closer
Speaker 4: and closer to having, you know, eventually an airplane that
Speaker 4: would fly. And I say we it's not just we
Speaker 4: as you know, the team that I lead, but we
Speaker 4: as humanity and also them to be able to together
Speaker 4: with us produce those kinds of effects. We're in the process.
Speaker 4: I'm hoping that by the end of the summer or
Speaker 4: early fall is we're going to have a book tendatively
Speaker 4: called the Soul Phone Experiments that lays out enough of
Speaker 4: the research and the case for the soul phone, including
Speaker 4: its opportunities and its pitfalls, which includes its potential abuse.
Speaker 4: This is not a technology that should be quote available
Speaker 4: until we can treat it with the reverence, respect, gratitude
Speaker 4: for being able to have such an opportunity.
Speaker 3: The question was then asked to doctor Schwartz, what can
Speaker 3: mediums and researchers learn from each other?
Speaker 4: Oh? Boy, that is a beautiful question. First of all,
Speaker 4: let's assume that we have genuinely open minded, curious and
Speaker 4: willing to be educated researchers who are not coming and
Speaker 4: thinking they know the answers or that their explanations are correct.
Speaker 4: They approach what a spiritualist for example, a medium and
Speaker 4: someone who is a broad to spiritual can share with them,
Speaker 4: so they'll listen with an open mind and an open heart.
Speaker 4: To call that loving openness. As my writing partner once
Speaker 4: referred to me for the Flife Experiment's book as well
Speaker 4: as the Aeriblical, the Energy Healing Experiments, and also the
Speaker 4: Good Experiments, Hughes to describe me as being an Orthodox agnostic,
Speaker 4: and what he meant by that was whether the question
Speaker 4: was is there gravity or is there God? My response is,
Speaker 4: I don't know, could be as could be. No. Show
Speaker 4: me the data. I'm open. And the plus side of
Speaker 4: being an Orthodox agnostic is that you're willing to listen
Speaker 4: to anything. You're willing to entertain, You're willing to be wrong,
Speaker 4: You're willing to you have humility, you're willing to enter.
Speaker 4: You know, you're seeking the truth, that you're going to
Speaker 4: follow the data where it takes you. You're not going
Speaker 4: to be pre judging whether something is true or not.
Speaker 4: And I've discovered that makes actually for a very good
Speaker 4: scientist because it leads you to be open to surprises
Speaker 4: and to be you know, willing to change your mind
Speaker 4: as a function of what you learn. The downside by
Speaker 4: the way turns out to be personal because if you
Speaker 4: have quoted a disease called science, which I do, I
Speaker 4: call it a disease because I am on a sidebar
Speaker 4: and sayd what do I mean by disease? Because I
Speaker 4: sort of can't help myself. Somebody tells me something something,
Speaker 4: They'll share some quote, curious idea or experience I have
Speaker 4: or I'm crazy, whatever, And what will happen is I'll
Speaker 4: hear their experience. It will then get translated into a question.
Speaker 4: Then a question will become a hypothesis. Then what ideas
Speaker 4: will suggest themselves about how way that you can rest
Speaker 4: this question? And then a thought experiment will pop into
Speaker 4: my head if I had time, I had the money, resources,
Speaker 4: and so whether I could do the experiment? And then
Speaker 4: what can I conclude it? It's so much of who
Speaker 4: I am, and I've been doing it for so many years, decades,
Speaker 4: I sort of can't not do it. It's just part
Speaker 4: of who I am. I met actually a neurosurgeon a
Speaker 4: few years ago, was very spiritually oriented, and I told
Speaker 4: him about my disease and he gave it an official diagnosis.
Speaker 4: He calls it scientitis, which I thought was pretty good.
Speaker 4: And so I have a chronic case of scientitis. I
Speaker 4: don't think it's treatable, but even if it was, I
Speaker 4: would not seek the treatment. So anyway, you need scientists
Speaker 4: who are going to be open and we're going to
Speaker 4: listen with an open mind and a heart and say
Speaker 4: and say, okay, what would this mean? How would we
Speaker 4: go about testing this, How could we know or not
Speaker 4: know whether it's true? What meaning would this have for
Speaker 4: the things that we know, whatever field it is, psychology, biology, physics, whatever,
Speaker 4: Based on what this means, you need an open minded scientist.
Speaker 4: But then you also need open minded people in spirituality,
Speaker 4: people who are also willing to be open to learn,
Speaker 4: to recognize that not everything that they were taught is
Speaker 4: necessarily the whole truth, is not necessarily completely accurate, and
Speaker 4: that all of us should be forgiven for our relative
Speaker 4: lack of knowledge or relative lack of discernment about what's
Speaker 4: the wheat and what's the chaff, what's the core essence
Speaker 4: and what's not. But if you can bring such a
Speaker 4: team of people together under the optimal conditions, the opportunity
Speaker 4: for mutual education and growth, both personally and professionally and
Speaker 4: in service to the greater good both Here in the
Speaker 4: quote there is huge I think.
Speaker 3: Next, doctor Schwartz was asked, are there any ethical concerns
Speaker 3: that should be considered and where do you see the
Speaker 3: future of survival research.
Speaker 4: Oh, I am not a medium. I do not see
Speaker 4: or hear spirit under most circumstances. Instead of joke and say,
Speaker 4: I'm like a blind man studying color vision, I have
Speaker 4: to depend on people who can see to give me
Speaker 4: the core phenomena that ask questions about to seek answers to.
Speaker 4: In terms of potential abuse, there are many. I think
Speaker 4: the greatest abuse would be people who would get hold
Speaker 4: of this technology. And I'm not talking about abuse as
Speaker 4: in abuse in terms of having false technology or a
Speaker 4: lot of people make claims that they have an app
Speaker 4: that can connect with spirit or device spirit. They make
Speaker 4: extraordinary claims in the absence of extraordinary evidence. That's one
Speaker 4: level of abuse. But I'm talking abuse of if we
Speaker 4: actually have a real technology, And one of my primary
Speaker 4: concerns has to do with people who would use it
Speaker 4: for political or military aims, particularly in the area of
Speaker 4: spying and in also identity theft, and of course, the
Speaker 4: only way that you can anticipate potential abuse is to
Speaker 4: imagine you have technology and say, okay, if I wanted
Speaker 4: to use it for various purposes, what kinds of things
Speaker 4: could I do with it? And so the kinds of
Speaker 4: issues that are arising with AI in terms of unanticipated
Speaker 4: potential negative consequences for society, the soul phone, if it
Speaker 4: were to become real, would need substantial safeguards in order
Speaker 4: to minimize its abuse. Both here end quote there. Right now,
Speaker 4: we're fortunate that we don't have a breakthrough technology. So
Speaker 4: it's not like we're the runaway train hasn't started yet.
Speaker 4: But my feeling is, and if I put a spiritual
Speaker 4: hat on that, it could be that the reason why
Speaker 4: we don't have a breakthrough yet is because we don't
Speaker 4: have the safeguards in place. First. So if there's a
Speaker 4: higher intelligence, of divine intelligence, and in particular with this
Speaker 4: technology wishes to as wisdom, not just intelligence, but wisdom,
Speaker 4: it would hopefully help us grow to be better stewards
Speaker 4: and caretakers of ourselves and the planet before we were
Speaker 4: given the keys to this technology.
Speaker 3: This is a good opportunity for our last break and
Speaker 3: when we come back, we'll hear words from doctor Schwartz
Speaker 3: as to where he thinks the research into the survival
Speaker 3: of consciousness will go. This is a rare opportunity to
Speaker 3: hear from one of the greats and to get a
Speaker 3: little insight into his mind and how it works. So
Speaker 3: we'll be right back. You're listening to Shades of the
Speaker 3: Afterlife on the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast AM Paranormal
Speaker 3: Podcast Network.
Speaker 9: Stay right there, there's more Sandra coming right out before
Speaker 9: the Art Belvault has classic audio waiting for you. Now
Speaker 9: go to Coast to Coast AM dot com forward details.
Speaker 1: Hey everyone, it's the Wizard of Weird Joshua P. Warren
Speaker 1: and you're listening to the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast
Speaker 1: AM Paranormal Podcast Network.
Speaker 3: Welcome back to Shades of the Afterlife. I'm Sandra Champlain
Speaker 3: and before we continue with doctor Gary Schwartz, a couple
Speaker 3: of websites I think you may enjoy the Soul Phone
Speaker 3: Foundation dot org. It's a great way to keep your
Speaker 3: eye on what's happening with the soul Phone. You can
Speaker 3: get involved. You can click on the about link and
Speaker 3: click on Gary Schwartz, PhD. You can read some of
Speaker 3: his books, including The Afterlife experiments, which is what I'm
Speaker 3: currently reading. Also, I encourage you to follow our friends
Speaker 3: at the International Spiritualist Federation. Their website is THEISF dot
Speaker 3: co dot UK. Or an easy thing to remember is
Speaker 3: go subscribe to their YouTube channel. There's only a few
Speaker 3: videos on there now, but I expect great things from them,
Speaker 3: and that's easy to remember ISF Science Forum. So let's
Speaker 3: continue with doctor Schwartz.
Speaker 4: In terms of your question about where survival of research
Speaker 4: is going to go, I think that there's the issues
Speaker 4: of knowing that it's here, knowing it's real, and all
Speaker 4: the transformations that could take place in terms of one
Speaker 4: of two of my favorite and extremely difficult challenges for humanity,
Speaker 4: especially if a soul phone comes along. But even if
Speaker 4: it doesn't, the first thing has to do with if
Speaker 4: there is no death, there's only transformation, then the way
Speaker 4: that we allow people to die presently is truly savage
Speaker 4: and horrific. The truth is we're kinder to our pets
Speaker 4: than we are to our parents, and so the notion
Speaker 4: of dying with dignity and being able to physically transition
Speaker 4: in a way that you could be prepared and look
Speaker 4: forward to future evolution would affect the grieving process. Obviously,
Speaker 4: there's all that whole area. A second area has to
Speaker 4: do with increasing integrity for maintaining relationships, including both abuses
Speaker 4: of inheritance and also people's even their names, defamation, the
Speaker 4: phenomenon of defamation. It's good enough to to fame someone
Speaker 4: if it's false when they're alive, but it also is
Speaker 4: really horrific if you do it when somebody is deceased,
Speaker 4: because not only does it hurt the people who are
Speaker 4: living that love them, but it also hurts those who
Speaker 4: have died. You can say, well, people don't care anymore
Speaker 4: about what you think about them, but they care that
Speaker 4: their loved ones are hurt and are being hurt, and
Speaker 4: they also care about truth, and caring about truth doesn't
Speaker 4: just disappear because you've transitioned to another state of being. Also,
Speaker 4: you know, very often, for example, money has been given
Speaker 4: to people's wills and then their children fight over how
Speaker 4: it's going to be used, or even worse, money is
Speaker 4: given for causes. You know, you to take some of
Speaker 4: the quote wealth that you've accumulated, and you wanted to
Speaker 4: go to university to support particular research or to support
Speaker 4: a particular charity, and then after the person has died
Speaker 4: and the money gets read reapported for some other purpose. Well,
Speaker 4: you know, to what extent do you have the right
Speaker 4: if you haven't died. Is there some way that you
Speaker 4: should be able to have some say in how your
Speaker 4: funds are spent after you've passed, or what if you
Speaker 4: come up with the technology you're a scientist, do you
Speaker 4: come up with some application that would benefit humanity and
Speaker 4: you help humanity to develop that technology if you want,
Speaker 4: should you have some say in how it's developed, particularly
Speaker 4: it's going to be used for purposes that are not
Speaker 4: in your ideal. And you can even ask the question
Speaker 4: about well, if it's quote your idea, shouldn't you have
Speaker 4: the right. For example, if some of those funds were yours,
Speaker 4: if you were here in the physical maybe you'd like
Speaker 4: to have those funds given to your grandchildren. Albeit but
Speaker 4: you've now done it from the other side. There are
Speaker 4: so many questions that become put on the table once
Speaker 4: we start thinking about, well, what if the public began
Speaker 4: to really accept that this was real? Are their post
Speaker 4: pecular person's rights? Are their responsibilities? Huge questions and I
Speaker 4: think they will require a lot of reflection.
Speaker 3: And when doctor Schwartz was asked what motivates him to
Speaker 3: research mediums and survival. Here's what he has to say.
Speaker 4: It is, first and foremost fundamental truth seeking. I'm old fashioned,
Speaker 4: where I genuinely care about truth, regardless of what it is,
Speaker 4: whether I like it, whether I dislike it, whether I
Speaker 4: approve of it or not approof of it. One of
Speaker 4: the greatest gifts we as humans have is the capacity
Speaker 4: to learn things and know whether something's real or not.
Speaker 4: It doesn't really matter whether it's survival of consciousness or
Speaker 4: the existence of angels or any other spiritual realm or
Speaker 4: anything in the physical world. Part of the driving force,
Speaker 4: of course, is truth seeking. That's number one. Number two
Speaker 4: is a sense of responsibility to seek truth that is
Speaker 4: of service to humanity and the greater good. You can
Speaker 4: say it's an ethical sense, it's a spiritual sense. I
Speaker 4: can see approach it from different points of view. For me,
Speaker 4: they're sell all merged because they're all pointing in that direction.
Speaker 4: But to the extent that you can do things that
Speaker 4: are quote win win, win, win win. They win for
Speaker 4: the individual, and they win for relationships, and they win
Speaker 4: for larger elements of society, but also are good for now,
Speaker 4: not just the person in their physical form. You take
Speaker 4: a longer and bigger view. So even though I am
Speaker 4: not a pastor, I am not a religious person in
Speaker 4: that sense. I went into psychology caring about the human
Speaker 4: mind and the human heart, and then when I discovered
Speaker 4: that that mind that heart continues after physical death, I
Speaker 4: cared about people's minds and hearts i e. Quote, their souls,
Speaker 4: whether they're here or there, and to the extent that
Speaker 4: what you do here has bearing on there, and what
Speaker 4: you do there has buried on here, especially if there's
Speaker 4: a recycling process. I'm in an evolution process. Then this
Speaker 4: is probably one of the most important issues facing humanity,
Speaker 4: and we do a lot of very unfortunate things to
Speaker 4: each other because we don't know. Out of ignorance my
Speaker 4: motivation for this, I began to see it was much bigger,
Speaker 4: it'd be in a much larger context, and therefore felt
Speaker 4: it was really important. Also, so it's not just to
Speaker 4: help a grieving parent make peace with the fact that
Speaker 4: their child may have died, also maybe have them look
Speaker 4: forward to being able to be reunited with their child
Speaker 4: if they like, in the future, or even continuing a
Speaker 4: relationship with them right now if they wish, Yes, all
Speaker 4: of that's very important to me. But it's not just
Speaker 4: simply reducing people's pain and suffering. It's much broader. And
Speaker 4: I also see what I put on a bigger lens,
Speaker 4: that survival of consciousness is a step to even bigger questions.
Speaker 4: So for me, I happen to have a I'll call
Speaker 4: this this is a calle pet interest, no pun invented,
Speaker 4: and not just a pet interest in survivor level of
Speaker 4: consciousness of your pets and you know, animals and all
Speaker 4: that kind of stuff. But I have a pet interest
Speaker 4: in the what I call the saint hypothesis, the idea
Speaker 4: that certain people who are quote bigger than life in
Speaker 4: this life, who are deeply loving and caring, that they
Speaker 4: can be given the opportunity and choose to continue to
Speaker 4: be of service to people on this planet, for example,
Speaker 4: if they wish in the form of in a religious context,
Speaker 4: and that there may be truth to the idea that
Speaker 4: you can pray to specific saints with the right intentions
Speaker 4: and will sometimes receive guidance and help from these people
Speaker 4: who are so caring. If that was true, it places
Speaker 4: quote humanity in a higher, greater light and then imagine
Speaker 4: that there are even higher beings the quote Angel hypothesis,
Speaker 4: and I publish a book in twenty eleven called The
Speaker 4: Sacred Promise, How Science is Discovering Spirits collaboration with this
Speaker 4: in our day the Lives. With the last quarter of
Speaker 4: the book, I applied it to the quote angel hypothesis,
Speaker 4: and I showed that you could apply the technology that
Speaker 4: we've been developing, both in mediumship and with actual technology
Speaker 4: to detect the presence of physical people and extend that
Speaker 4: to angels to the extent that they wished to collaborate
Speaker 4: in research, and they wished their presence to be known.
Speaker 4: For me, my motivation is multi level, and I think
Speaker 4: on top of that, I then feel a moral and
Speaker 4: ethical responsibility to continue to play a role in nurturing
Speaker 4: that to unfold. Although you know, I would prefer there
Speaker 4: to be saints, prefer to be angels. I'd rather there
Speaker 4: be a universe of an infinitely compassionate and intelligent mind.
Speaker 4: My job as a scientist is not to confirm the
Speaker 4: way I wish the universe to be. My responsibility is
Speaker 4: to help contribute to understanding how it really is. And
Speaker 4: so that's what I consider to be my more of
Speaker 4: an ethical job. But to the extent that these good
Speaker 4: things are on the horizon and the evidence is pointed
Speaker 4: that way, then I feel an add responsibility and gift
Speaker 4: of the opportunity to play a small role in that process.
Speaker 3: Good things certainly are on the horizon. Just remember to
Speaker 3: go visit the Soul Phonefoundation dot org and our new
Speaker 3: friends at THEISF dot co dot UK, or next time
Speaker 3: on YouTube just type in ISF Science Forum. Keep an
Speaker 3: eye on them. Good things to come. I feel the
Speaker 3: same as doctor Schwartz. It's our responsibility to continue to explore,
Speaker 3: to continue to share. I love what he said about
Speaker 3: Wilbur and Orville write it was about one hundred and
Speaker 3: twenty years ago when the first flight was taken, and
Speaker 3: look where we are now. When you take a flight,
Speaker 3: do you ever think about Orville and Wilbur? I sure do,
Speaker 3: because I think of the conversation being changed about the afterlife.
Speaker 3: I know it won't be one hundred and twenty years
Speaker 3: from now. It will be much much sooner, probably in
Speaker 3: our lifetimes when most people are communicating with their loved
Speaker 3: ones and feel confident about the afterlife. So you bet
Speaker 3: I'm going to do everything I can to share everything
Speaker 3: and everyone that I know with that Avery reminder to
Speaker 3: come visit me. Come visit our Sunday gathering. Join about
Speaker 3: fifteen minutes early so you can say hello. That's our
Speaker 3: non denominational Sunday service with a Flair Medium demonstration, great music,
Speaker 3: and it's a lot of fun. Take a medium class,
Speaker 3: see what we have going on. Join our Facebook group.
Speaker 3: Just go to Don'tdie dot com. Good things there and
Speaker 3: so much more. I'm Sandra Champlain. I really want to
Speaker 3: thank you for listening to Shades of the Afterlife on
Speaker 3: the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast AM Paranormal Podcast Network.
Speaker 2: And if you like this episode of Shades of the Afterlife,
Speaker 2: wait until you hear the next one. Thank you for
Speaker 2: listening to the iHeartRadio and Coast to Coast AM Paranormal
Speaker 2: Podcast Network.