Swedish medium caught cheating

mac wrote:thanks for the clarification, Z - I thought you might fill in the gaps...

No worries, Mac.

Hello guys,

I want to state here in all clarity, that what Zerdini wrote regarding my involvement is false!

I (Kai Muegge) only criticised, that J.L. was using the full name of the guy, a thing I am always very cautious of , before I discredit someone with name in the internet!

Jane L., after she was requested to give more information, but to kick names into the mud - we all know how easy it is to judge - what has happened in the last 3 years and if there was a true mediumship or not. She was at least driving 3 years weekly 200 km to get there. So the community was wondering, if there was nuttin to say about this period of time.

We all know, that cheating is a problem and that there can be complex backgrounds and reasons, why even genuine mediums could do that!

To make it clear: CHEATING IS THE POISON FOR THE PHYSICAL MEDIUMSHIP MOVEMENT and I condemn it in every way!

Nevertheless is Zerdinis allegation wrong, Jane Lyzell was victim of my wrath.
The site is lead by Robin Foy and the reasons for Janes deactivation were her anger-based postings at the end of a long history when she was expressing forms of negativity many members of PM4U felt insulted by!

I do not know, Zerdini, is it my close Relationship to Robin, that you use my name here negatively???
I mean its not the first time, that you and your followers try to bring my name in discredition, I wonder why!?

Everybody who knows me, know that my comments are always were outballanced and insult noone, neither Jane L.!

I want Zerdini to show, why he has used my name in this connection.
The quote of him is listed below!

Please Zerdini stop to use my name in false connections

Thank you!

Kai Muegge
Chairman/FEG Germany

zerdini wrote:Anders Akesson, a Swedish 'physical medium', was caught cheating at a seance in Sweden.

Jane Lyzell, a former sitter in his circle, wrote about this on PM4U and incurred the wrath of the members including Kai Muegee for exposing this. So much so that Robin Foy sent the following message to all members one of whom sent it on to me:

A message to all members of Physical Mediumship 4U:

Hi Everybody,

I am sorry to say that not only did I delete Jane Lyzell's original discussion on this subject, but I am also about to delete her current one.

Personally, I do not condone cheating at all where physical mediumship and its phenomena are concerned. This lady sat in the medium's circle - she tells us - for 3 years. The medium concerned cheated. That is a fact. He confessed and apologised regarding his moments of madness, but I am assured that there has been some genuine phenomena in the course of his physical mediumship. I do not believe such potential mediumship should be lost for all time because of a stupid mistake on his part.

I cannot believe that this lady, who should have shown some loyalty to the circle, and compassion regarding his wretched situation, could not wait to spread the news of the cheating and THE ACTUAL NAME of the medium to anyone and everyone throughout the world!!

In this, I agree entirely with Kai Muegge. The case could have been presented without naming the medium concerned, as this can only damage the cause, and the whole perception of physical mediumship.

In this case, she has determinedly spread negativity with regard to all physical mediumship and phenomena. I will not allow such brazen negativity on my site!!

The medium concerned will obviously have great difficulty in restoring his mediumship, given the fact that he has lost all crdibility at the moment. However, has sat for several years to devlop what gifts he had, and it would be a shame to lose that work and experience totally. It is my belief that if he goes back to square one, and once more starts the development of his mediumship, he should be given another chance, but this when he has EARNED the right to be trusted again. SPIRIT themselves will not desert him. Nor should those of us who believe in fairness, and it is appropriate to quote: 'Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone'.

A general discussion on the site about fraudulence in physical mediumship is one thing. To actively whip up hatred and mistrust against a specific person in this way is totally wrong.

Regards, Robin

Anders Akesson was recently at Cober Hill where I am informed he demonstrated his mediumship alongside Stuart A. and allegedly stated that he is going to take over when the latter retires.

P.S. The last sentence is open to correction if anyone knows better.

You want to know Kai?

Here are the posts in question:

Jane posted the following on Foy's website PM4U:
Circle of LIFE" Physical phenomena in Sweden.

The medium Anders Åkesson has been been caught cheating during a physical seance - and has himself admitted this in public!
Thought you needed to know it in here - so sad!

so be careful in your building physical circles!

Jane

Dear Jane!

Its me Kai from the FEG!

Believe me, I was angry when I heard what what a swedish medium did!
That poisons the atmosphere for all other and genuine working mediums like me.

But despite my anger and the awaited negative effect on my future sitters, that may loose their trust, this will influence the quality of the trance and this will influence the phenomena at last (you see: me and every other medium is affected by such messages!), my morals would forbid me to let fall a man completely, that has worked for spirit for 15 years and took on his shoulders danger and burden for the uplifting of others.

I hope I never come in a situation, like this swedish guy - my mediumship is fresh and needs no fraudulent support, but we know from history, that mediums after many years, after their power has waned, substitute phenomena, that doesn t come through anymore with fraudulent means.
I admit - for all observers that is a catastrophe, no question.

But on the other hand side I am given from reliable source infoprmation, that makes me sure THAT THIS GUYS MEDIUMSHIP WAS GENUINE!

When we let these people fall after they have failed, we for example would have never been given the documantation of gigantic Mediumships like that of Eusapia Paladino for example. Because she cheated also, when she felt under pressure - but if they would have let her fall, history would have never been fed with the fascinating mediumship of her!

I know, its socially complicated, but the people who are concerned are traumatized enough! The swedisch medium has to re-establish his mediumship now and he has broken the trust of many.

This is all complicated enough!

But I consider it naughty to use the name of one who was sharing his gifts for so mnany years and to use his full name here to discredit him once and for all!

In Germany we say: to kick someone who is laying on the ground already!

That cannot be correlated with my moral and ethics, even though this swedish guy did something naughty too!

I do not know why, but that could be the reason why your post was deleted!
Never do discredit others, even though you are disappointed by them!
Its bad enough for their Karma, but do you need to asperse your karma too?

thats my opinion and I know it is a dangerous game to comment on that,
but my mediumship is genuine and that allows me to comment that!

I am in the early years of development and the power of my mediumship is in full bloom!
But what is with the years!? By all we know it will wane and we have to accept that!
Its not right what this swedish Medium did, but never kick a guy that is already lying on the ground!
That is not right also!

Kai/FEG

Ansers Akesson and his wife are still members of PM4U as are other dubious physical mediums whose mediumship has been heavily criticised on here and other forums.

zerdini wrote:Ansers Akesson and his wife are still members of PM4U as are other dubious physical mediums whose mediumship has been heavily criticised on here and other forums.

ZERDINI, hello!

I wanted to know, why you are pointing out my name in connection with the allegation of wrathful behaviour against Jane L.!?
I was the one who tried to keep the waves calm and was adressing with an explanatory letter to Jane you have published by the way too!

In this letter you can see my attitude that
1. insults nobody
2. condemns fraud
3. and tries to outline why her angerful postings MIGHT have been erased.

So why are you using my name, intending to bring it in connection with the negative statement of yours sounding like : J.L was the victim of the wrath of Kai Muegge (I quoted it before!)
Why do you do that?

Refferring to your quote at the beginning regarding PM4U: On PM4U are many different types of people!

I do not know where you draw your lines, Zerdini.
Are you not always referring to Gordon Higginsons Mediumship?
See, his mediumship was considered fraudulent by many also!

So this here is a forum WHERE ALSO permanently postings are done concerning THE ALLEGED FRAUDULENT MEDIUM Gordon Higginson! What is the difference so between here and PM4U?

The only difference is, that you seem to think you know it better!
Thats no attack, Zerdini, but a humble analysis (a little one admittedly)

Please stop to use my name in false connection!

Respectfully
Kai

Kai

You never sat with Gordon Higginson nor experienced his mediumship - I DID!

You make statements for which you personally have not the slightest evidence.

There is not the slightest comparison with Anders Akesson or indeed your own mediumship which I have not experienced either.

Your statement was analysed by a lawyer on another forum as follows:

"But on the other hand side I am given from reliable source information, that makes me sure THAT THIS GUYS MEDIUMSHIP WAS GENUINE!"

Oh yes ? So, Mr Free, you are quite happy to accept the word of this (unnamed) "reliable source" that Akesson's mediumship was genuine ... in the face of absolutely unequivocal evidence and admission that he CHEATED ? What kind of scientific or rational assessment is THAT? It sounds like wishful thinking to me.
The guy has been accused of cheating and has admitted it. That casts doubt on ALL of his previous achievements, no matter how much you may admire them.

"When we let these people fall after they have failed, we for example would have never been given the documantation of gigantic Mediumships like that of Eusapia Paladino for example. Because she cheated also, when she felt under pressure - but if they would have let her fall, history would have never been fed with the fascinating mediumship of her!
I know, its socially complicated, but the people who are concerned are traumatized enough! The swedisch medium has to re-establish his mediumship now and he has broken the trust of many."

"Socially complicated"? What on earth are you talking about ? He cheated. So his credibility is shot. End of story. Nothing "socially complicated" about that. It may sound harsh but it is the only rational response. Why should I, or anyone else, believe in the quality of his earlier work when he has just tried to deceive me big time ?

"This is all complicated enough! But I consider it naughty to use the name of one who was sharing his gifts for so many years and to use his full name here to discredit him once and for all!"

Nobody needs to "discredit him". And his "gifts" are now in serious doubt. He has done that entirely on his own. And it is not really "complicated" at all. He cheated ... He has acknowledged it .... End of assessment.
Sorry, but we simply cannot afford to compromise standards AT ALL on something so important. When my time comes, and my 'deceased' relatives come to help me to 'cross over', I don't want them saying "Sorry Trev, but that Akesson character fed you a load of horlicks, so we haven't come to take you anywhere. You're just going to die, end of. Sorry !"

In Germany we say: to kick someone who is laying on the ground already!

I prefer to be guided by the saying that George W. Bush tried to quote ....
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Loose translation : Only a true mug gets fooled by the same trick for a second time

That cannot be correlated with my moral and ethics, even though this swedish guy did something naughty too!

WHAT ?! What ethics and morals are these, then ? I'm sorry but they seem rather flexible and self-serving to me. Supporting a liar and a cheat on the basis that (if he wasn't cheating the same way in the past) he has done some good work in his time ? The Swedish guy did not do something "naughty", he did something utterly disgraceful and totally inexcusable.
Has it not occurred to you that impartial observers like myself might conclude that your support for Akesson might be based on the possibility that you might find yourself in a similar situation in the future - a possibility you have mentioned yourself ?

I cannot put it better than that, Kai.

Zerdini I wanted you to justify why you use my name in false connection!


That your "lawyer" - I am not interested in, do not know him - has different opinions than me, explains not why you have falsely used my name!

And what the discussion concerns: I was from my psychological background searching for motives why a genuine medium could cheat at all!

Because we know that definitly from Eusapia f.e.!

And there are actually psychological conditions that would underline that.

I theorized moreover a hypothetical medium whose powers are waning and doesn t want to disappoint and is afraid of people who turn away from him - these can be strong psychogical motors for fraud!

Then I added that I can understand such motives - I am a pedagogue by profession, what let me judge very socially upon people - and remarked, that a mediumship that is as young as mine and stands in full bloom, and is wanted by the people, is not yet concerned with such questions regarding disappointment and being let fallen down when a mediumship wanes.

My deeply honest personality and my deep respect for the spirit world would forbid me to cheat in any way whatsoever. Moreover I am in an actively induced deep trance, induced through up to 20 minutes extensive holotropic breathing.

After such an exercise I want to see someone cheating. That simply doesn t work!

So any tries to discredit or to doubt my mediumship in connection with this discussion is only bad manner, nothing else.

Your personal experiences with Gordon Higginson are no proof whatsoever, that he was cheat-free.
Have you sat with Anders? Have you read how Jane L. was describing his seances?
You see, in personal experiences never lies the answer reg. fraud!

Its just a few days ago I read Colvins report about a higginson sitting.
Following him YOU was badly fooled, ZERDINI.
He sat with him! And he claims the opposite of what you describe.

See, I only want to outline how relative this all is, and that we must be very careful, where we draw the line!

And in the sense of this care, I wanted to have Jane L. give informations but allegations, not to use names, and so forth - her erased I have not, its Robins site.

At the end here I want to outline, that you obviously do not want to explain why you - by the way further on - try to discredit my name (this time with the quotes of your ominous lawyer, who claims at the end, I would have announced my own cheating in the future, when my powers wane - ridicolous!)

Zerdini, we have different views on things, thats all.
Say goodbye to the idea, that you have booked the truth for yourself!
Or was it truthful to allege, I was wrathful against Jane!?
You simply used my name, because you feel a antipathy for me, that probably lies in my close relationship to Robin Foy and you cannot withstand your impulses to bring my name in connection to negative contents.

I theorize that, because I haven t heard an apologize after three requests for an explanation!

Kai

quote="zerdini"]Kai

You never sat with Gordon Higginson nor experienced his mediumship - I DID!

And Jane L. spoke about Anders like you do about Gordon, that means nothing! And is as personal as my morals!

You make statements for which you personally have not the slightest evidence.

There is not the slightest comparison with Anders Akesson or indeed your own mediumship which I have not experienced either.

Your statement was analysed by a lawyer on another forum as follows:

"But on the other hand side I am given from reliable source information, that makes me sure THAT THIS GUYS MEDIUMSHIP WAS GENUINE!"

Oh yes ? So, Mr Free, you are quite happy to accept the word of this (unnamed) "reliable source" that Akesson's mediumship was genuine ... in the face of absolutely unequivocal evidence and admission that he CHEATED ? What kind of scientific or rational assessment is THAT? It sounds like wishful thinking to me.
The guy has been accused of cheating and has admitted it. That casts doubt on ALL of his previous achievements, no matter how much you may admire them.

"When we let these people fall after they have failed, we for example would have never been given the documantation of gigantic Mediumships like that of Eusapia Paladino for example. Because she cheated also, when she felt under pressure - but if they would have let her fall, history would have never been fed with the fascinating mediumship of her!
I know, its socially complicated, but the people who are concerned are traumatized enough! The swedisch medium has to re-establish his mediumship now and he has broken the trust of many."

"Socially complicated"? What on earth are you talking about ? He cheated. So his credibility is shot. End of story. Nothing "socially complicated" about that. It may sound harsh but it is the only rational response. Why should I, or anyone else, believe in the quality of his earlier work when he has just tried to deceive me big time ?

"This is all complicated enough! But I consider it naughty to use the name of one who was sharing his gifts for so many years and to use his full name here to discredit him once and for all!"

Nobody needs to "discredit him". And his "gifts" are now in serious doubt. He has done that entirely on his own. And it is not really "complicated" at all. He cheated ... He has acknowledged it .... End of assessment.
Sorry, but we simply cannot afford to compromise standards AT ALL on something so important. When my time comes, and my 'deceased' relatives come to help me to 'cross over', I don't want them saying "Sorry Trev, but that Akesson character fed you a load of horlicks, so we haven't come to take you anywhere. You're just going to die, end of. Sorry !"

In Germany we say: to kick someone who is laying on the ground already!

I prefer to be guided by the saying that George W. Bush tried to quote ....
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Loose translation : Only a true mug gets fooled by the same trick for a second time

That cannot be correlated with my moral and ethics, even though this swedish guy did something naughty too!

WHAT ?! What ethics and morals are these, then ? I'm sorry but they seem rather flexible and self-serving to me. Supporting a liar and a cheat on the basis that (if he wasn't cheating the same way in the past) he has done some good work in his time ? The Swedish guy did not do something "naughty", he did something utterly disgraceful and totally inexcusable.
Has it not occurred to you that impartial observers like myself might conclude that your support for Akesson might be based on the possibility that you might find yourself in a similar situation in the future - a possibility you have mentioned yourself ?

I cannot put it better than that, Kai.

[/quote]

MrFree,

You have suggested that Z's remark which mentions your name is in some way designed to bring your name into disrepute in that to you it appears to be suggesting that

"J.L was the victim of the wrath of Kai Muegge"

It does seem surprising to me, that the mere mention of your name, as one of those who were not in support of the lady's post is in some way suggesting anythin untoward at all.

The reality is, a person has cheated, they have admitted they cheated, and in doing so they inevitably bring their previous, allegedly genuine mediumship, into question.

Was it in fact genuine, or was it a case of not being caught out in fraudulent conduct until this occasion?

That is a genuine question that must be asked. Indeed, it is important that we do question, because to not do so allows those who are inclined to cheat to do so with impunity.

We cannot excuse fraud. Not under any circumstances.

If this person was capable of genuine physical mediumship but chose to cheat, they must accept the consequences of doing so and getting caught.

One of those consequences is undoubtedly that people will talk about it. Some will write about it, and in historical terms, this person's name will be added to the unfortunately long list of those who profess to be physical mediums who have been caught cheating, and in doing so brought the credibilty of physical mediumship into disrepute.

When people are attacked because they have made reference to person's who have been caught cheating, they should be applauded, not criticised or rejected, or treated as if somehow they are the person who has done wrong for mentioning the situation. They have done no wrong.

The medium who cheated is the person who has done wrong. And that wrong is not merely a case of being "naughty" it is a situation where innocent, sincere, and vulnerable people were being duped by a dishonest person. It is a situation where the validity of spirit is being undermined. It is a situation where credability is being destroyed. It is unexcusable.

Having said that, I would support your right to express your viewpoint. As I support the lady's right to have spoken. As I support Z's right to have spoken.

On this forum people are "free" to express their opinions, and will not be arbitrarily deleted. Unless you are abusive, or accuse people in an insulting or unpleasant manner you are welcome to discuss this difficult situation with all the unpleasant ramifations it has for all of us who believe in the reality of spirit and spirit's desire to prove their reality to the world.

I would forget Eusapia Kai, if the Society of Psychical Research had not changed their early ground rules, that a medium caught in fraud should be instantly dissmissed from futher review, then she would have ended up a footnote of history.

I take it you are familiar with the report of the committee to the National Convention Of Spiritualists Cleveland Ohio 1867 on Dark Seances. The book Lights and Shadows of Spiritualiism by DD Hume and Emma Hardinge Brittens Dark Circles and Cabinets.

Read these Kai and please throw out any constraints others are telling you, switch on the light (dimly at first) bring in the thermographic video cameras and take it back to where it always should have been.

The first record of fraud was circa 1853 and the Koons Spirit House, which of course is where the John King story started

Am I alone in wondering why folks become members of PM4U when they could join Physical Mediumship Forum and debate this topic fully without censure?

Indeed one might even wonder why this topic is in 'Spiritualism Link' when it has so little directly to do with Modern Spiritualism and everything to do with physical mediumship. (let's not forget that evidential mediumship, as in Spiritualism, appears not to be any part of this discussion)

I know that member poaching is not acceptable but maybe someone could drop an invitation to the individual banned from PM4U, and all others who might be interested, to join in a full discussion there of the matter in question?

MrFree,

I have said that you are welcome to express your views so long as you are not rude or abusive.

Your remark suggesting that Z simply used your name because (you allege) he feels an antipathy towards you, as a result of your alleged

"close relationship to Robin Foy"

and claiming Z cannot "withstand" his "impulses to bring (your) name in connection to negative contents"

is stepping over the line into abuse. I must ask you to moderate your tone and not make allegations of this kind.

Lis
Admin

Mac, as far as I know physical mediumship IS still a part of Modern Spiritualism, albeit a highly controversal part, apparently subject to fraud.

Of course, until physical mediumship can once again demonstrate real evidence of survival, that is conclusive demonstrations of spirit return, identifiable, and recognised, it will in real terms remain in the dark, and at the fringes of Spiritualism.

Of course people are welcome to go elsewhere to discuss the issues but I don't think that they are prevented from expressing their opinions on here either.

Liz!

And what is with Zerdinis untruthful remarks about my behaviour?

I wrote additionally to what you have quoted: "I theorize that because Z is not answering three times!"

This you NOT quote!

Forget it, Liz!

MrFree wrote:Liz!

And what is with Zerdinis untruthful remarks about my behaviour?

I wrote additionally to what you have quoted: "I theorize that because Z is not answering three times!"

This you NOT quote!

Forget it, Liz!

I will again remind you MrFree you are stepping over the line.

If you wish to be rude to me as well, please do so using my correct name.

Lis wrote:Mac, as far as I know physical mediumship IS still a part of Modern Spiritualism, albeit a highly controversal part, apparently subject to fraud.

Of course, until physical mediumship can once again demonstrate real evidence of survival, that is conclusive demonstrations of spirit return, identifiable, and recognised, it will in real terms remain in the dark, and at the fringes of Spiritualism.

Of course people are welcome to go elsewhere to discuss the issues but I don't think that they are prevented from expressing their opinions on here either.

I can agree, Lis, that it is but hardly in the manner it's being debated recently.... Didn't Wes mention earlier that it's a strange form of Spiritualism?

Do any of the admitted-fraudulent phenomena under debate relate to the business of demonstrating evidence of survival and communication through mediumship? If so then I've missed it somewhere in the plethora of angry claims and counter-claims....

It's not Modern Spiritualism as I know it or as I want to see it portrayed in such an argumentative and unproductive way.

I guess I should get mi coat on.....?

Zerdini I wanted you to justify why you use my name in false connection!

I can certainly do that Kai. Whether you realise it or not your attempts to justify fraud, psychological or not, do not cut much ice with me, or most people I suspect, barring Robin Foy, of course. It is not a false connection.

That your "lawyer" - I am not interested in, do not know him - has different opinions than me, explains not why you have falsely used my name!

You do know him, Kai. He has examined your statements and they do not stand up to scrutiny despite your protestations.

And what the discussion concerns: I was from my psychological background searching for motives why a genuine medium could cheat at all!

Motives? Does it matter? He pretended to relay information from Jane’s sister which was blatantly false.

Because we know that definitly from Eusapia f.e.!

I know you keep quoting Eusapia Palladino but you seem to forget that she stated that she would cheat if she wasn’t watched.

And there are actually psychological conditions that would underline that.

I theorized moreover a hypothetical medium whose powers are waning and doesn t want to disappoint and is afraid of people who turn away from him - these can be strong psychogical motors for fraud!

That’s no excuse!

Then I added that I can understand such motives - I am a pedagogue by profession, what let me judge very socially upon people - and remarked, that a mediumship that is as young as mine and stands in full bloom, and is wanted by the people, is not yet concerned with such questions regarding disappointment and being let fallen down when a mediumship wanes.

My deeply honest personality and my deep respect for the spirit world would forbid me to cheat in any way whatsoever. Moreover I am in an actively induced deep trance, induced through up to 20 minutes extensive holotropic breathing.

There is a lot of controversy over ‘holotropic breathing’ e.g in Ken Wilber’s
"Eye of Spirit" (1996) he criticizes Grof's assertion that in order to access transpersonal states of consciousness a person must necessarily first regress to the perinatal state to resolve the trauma of (and/or around) birth. Wilber states that while this is sometimes the case, it is so only in a limited number of cases.
Dr Watt expressed professional concerns that the hyperventilation technique might cause seizure or lead to psychosis in vulnerable people. (The Scotsman, 14 October 1993).

After such an exercise I want to see someone cheating. That simply doesn t work!
So any tries to discredit or to doubt my mediumship in connection with this discussion is only bad manner, nothing else.


See above

Your personal experiences with Gordon Higginson are no proof whatsoever, that he was cheat-free.

Neither is your assertion. My personal experiences are based on many years of personal observation whereas yours are not.

Have you sat with Anders?

No.

Have you read how Jane L. was describing his seances?

Yes

You see, in personal experiences never lies the answer reg. fraud!

Of course it does.

Its just a few days ago I read Colvins report about a higginson sitting.
Following him YOU was badly fooled, ZERDINI.
He sat with him! And he claims the opposite of what you describe.

I was at the same sitting as Barrie Colvin – you weren’t!
I was not badly fooled at all. I complained to the Press Council at the time over Colvin’s allegations which were a load of rubbish.

See, I only want to outline how relative this all is, and that we must be very careful, where we draw the line!

We draw the line at outright fraud which Akesson publicly admitted and genuine mediumship.

And in the sense of this care, I wanted to have Jane L. give informations but allegations, not to use names, and so forth - her erased I have not, its Robins site.

I know Jane personally and have read her detailed allegations.

At the end here I want to outline, that you obviously do not want to explain why you - by the way further on - try to discredit my name (this time with the quotes of your ominous lawyer, who claims at the end, I would have announced my own cheating in the future, when my powers wane - ridicolous!)

I have explained it in great detail.

Zerdini, we have different views on things, thats all.

We have had this debate before on another forum, Kai and we agreed to disagree did we not?

Say goodbye to the idea, that you have booked the truth for yourself!

Likewise.

Or was it truthful to allege, I was wrathful against Jane!?

Yes it was.

You simply used my name, because you feel a antipathy for me, that probably lies in my close relationship to Robin Foy and you cannot withstand your impulses to bring my name in connection to negative contents.

I have no antipathy towards you – I just feel you are naive.

I theorize that, because I haven t heard an apologize after three requests for an explanation!

Well I’ve given it to you now, Kai.

Kai

I have read this thread and cannot see in what way Z has made allegations about you, apart from repeating what you have written. As such you may have to explain what you actually feel he has done wrong with specific points to highlight it.

At the moment I believe your complaints about Z are lost in translation. As a result you are overstepping the line in your approach.

No Mac,

Don't grab your coat yet!

I agree with you, that is the saddest part of this whole thread really. The real issue of whether these mediums have been producing any genuine evidence of survival as against a load of 'phenomena' which really has nothing to do with proving spirit exists, goes out the window when yet another person is caught cheating.

Until physical mediumships gets over reversing cardigans, wanderings in the dark, and 'famous' alleged spirit visitors, and gets back to what it is all about - bringing loved ones through who are recognised and prove who they are - it really is all a waste of time.

Absolutely Lis

To the bereaved Physical mediumship should provide the best comfort, as should the lost art of giving private readings in trance state, where the loved one is able to speak with their family members. Where in all of this is the proof of survival, in what way could anyone be recommended to go to a Medium "who is real but cheats at times".

Come on everyone lets get real, Cheating is treating those in need with absolute disdain.

Lis wrote:No Mac,

Don't grab your coat yet!

I agree with you, that is the saddest part of this whole thread really. The real issue of whether these mediums have been producing any genuine evidence of survival as against a load of 'phenomena' which really has nothing to do with proving spirit exists, goes out the window when yet another person is caught cheating.

Until physical mediumships gets over reversing cardigans, wanderings in the dark, and 'famous' alleged spirit visitors, and gets back to what it is all about - bringing loved ones through who are recognised and prove who they are - it really is all a waste of time.

I won't get mi coat on for the moment, Lis, but I was wrong. quote "Motives? Does it matter? He pretended to relay information from Jane’s sister which was blatantly false." That I didn't know so my assertion about evidence is shot ooopps

So let's get this topic back on track shall we?

The potential value of physical mediumship is that it will provide concrete, irrefutable evidence of survival of the human personality, and in such a way that known people who have physically died, are able to return, communicate and prove their continued existence by giving reliable information about themselves.

Unlike in the past, today's physical mediums, or many of them, have little if any content in their seances that actually provides such evidence for survival.

Chairs thrown into the room at the end of the seance (medium still in it of course), cardigans reversed, unidentified lights in the darkness, unseen hands clasping the hands of the sitters in the darkness, and even trumpets running amok around the dark room, do not constitute evidence of survival. They are phenomena which is open to other explanations and can, as we are all (sadly) well aware, be produced fraudulently.

It is time that physical mediumship got back to the essential aspect. Proof of survival. We need to get rid of the darkness, and all the other 'phenomena' and focus of spirit giving their messages of survival.

There are so many ways in which physical seances could be run, without the cable ties, which clearly people can get out of, with safety measures and measures to prevent fraud, and equipment that would conclusively show that there was no cheating going (or there was if someone was daft enough to try to cheat).

Let's move physical mediumship into the 21st century and make it relevant once more.

And let us, stand firm against fraud. Let us be unremitting in rejecting the fraudulent medium. Give them no quarter if they cheat. Even if they are capable of genuine mediumship, when they cheat they lose the right to our respect or our trust and that is the consequence of their moral and ethical failure not ours.

huh! That seemed to quieten folks down some...needed it.

"He pretended to relay information from Jane’s sister which was blatantly false." This is what really matters - all the rest is of lesser importance.

This is the most disgraceful fraud of all. Cheating through fraudulent phenomena is one thing but this is something else.

Any such fraudulent mediumship - physical or mental alike - just stinks.

[quote] Anders Akesson was recently at Cober Hill where I am informed he demonstrated his mediumship alongside Stuart A. and allegedly stated that he is going to take over when the latter retires. [quote]



Anders Akersson has never demonstrated physical mediumship at a Stewart Alexander seminar.

[quote="Claire"][quote] Anders Akesson was recently at Cober Hill where I am informed he demonstrated his mediumship alongside Stuart A. and allegedly stated that he is going to take over when the latter retires.

Anders Akersson has never demonstrated physical mediumship at a Stewart Alexander seminar.

If this is accurate, the whole business is becoming increasingly farcical.