• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Afterlife: Proof!

Apathia

Philosopher
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
7,505
Location
Mesa, AZ
Back in the '90s I took care of an elderly man till he breathed his last.
At the time of his passing there was some unexplained phenomena with the lights in his home. At the time I was so intrigued as to think these might be indicative of his soul making a scene upon departure.

I wrote the incident down for his daughter in law and still have the account which I'm posting here.

"Dear Adrienna,

As you requested, I’ll write down a brief account of the matter with the kitchen light switch. It was a small anomaly, but the timing was significant, and it was not so uncommon an event. There are few families who don’t have something to tell of moved portraits, fallen objects, telephone rings, flickering lights, and even apparitions at the moment of the departure of a loved one.

I was up late last night writing out the first account which came to be too long with too much of my own interpretation. I’ll cut all of that here, leaving it for you and yours to make sense of it in your own relationship with Harold.

As I said, I was at the stove stirring ramen when the lights flickered. That was my first take on it as I began to wonder if a PG and E outage was immanent. But I realized it had only been the kitchen ceiling light.

Very soon the kitchen light went out altogether, this while I was still at the stove attending to my meal. Since there wasn’t the pop of an expended bulb, and all the other lights were on, I thought perhaps a breaker had shut. It happens from time to time. So I took my pan off the stove and headed for the hallway to check the box. That’s when I saw the kitchen ceiling light switch was in the down position, just as if someone had flipped it off. I flipped it back up, and the light came on as normally.

Since I’ve read and heard of little signs about the departing and had already been frequently checking on Harold, since we knew it could be any time, I immediately went to his bedside, but didn’t remain because he seemed to be breathing in the same fashion as he had the last time I looked in on him.

I returned to the kitchen and dumped my ramen into a bowl, but before I could set down to it, I felt I needed to go back to Harold.
I found he wasn’t breathing. I listened closely and tried to take his pulse. There wasn’t any. Also his forehead was growing cooler, and I couldn’t feel the pressure of his life-force or “aura” as I was accustomed. (Earlier in the hour when Bonnie and I had turned him on his side, I’d noticed that it was exceptionally “warm.” Not his body temperature but the “aura” in the region of his forehead. Being inexperienced in interpreting these things, I hadn’t known what to make of it.) Now it was absent.

Sorry for the almost clinical details. I wanted to be sure before I marked down the time (between 4:45 and 4:55 when I called for Bob). The important thing is that his passing was brief and tranquil without a struggle. No more than two or three minutes passed between the first check when he still appeared to be breathing and the second when he was done.

For the sake of the skeptic in me, I examined the light switch. There was no way it could have been caught half on half off and flipped off of itself. And though when very tired I absentmindedly do things, I wasn’t so tired as to flip off the switch myself, and I was at the stove when it happened. Also there wasn’t a momentary power outage, for that’s all it takes to mess up the digital clock on the top of the TV. It would have been blinking.

If the event had the purpose of getting my attention, I wish I had paid more, waiting at his bedside from the first check. Thankfully all our prayers that it would be an easy and gentle time for him were answered. His expression was peaceful as if in a restful sleep."

You have it right there folks. How else could have the lighting gone weird this way except H.W's. spirit making the last tour of his home before venturing off to the Astral Plane?

[Disclaimers:
1. In those days I was into "Energy Healing" woo-woo. I could "feel" "auras."
After playing with this stuff for a few years, I saw enough to dismiss it as illusion and the placebo effect.

2. There's nothing here that proves anything about a soul life after death. There isn't even a photographical ghost. There's only something that happened with the lights.

3. The wisdom achieved with doing the three score and ten has included the fact that it is easy for me to fool myself.]
 
Last edited:
As a rural mechanic once said to my college roommate after working on his 1962 Ford Falcon and returning it with the horn wired to the turn signal, "That 'lectricity, it's tricky stuff".
 
Is this just a one-off proof, or are you planning to start a newsletter? I would subscribe.

Great idea!
Better a Youtube channel in which I go around to where people are dying and wait for something to happen to make paranormal of.
That could spin into a TV series:
Death Watch: Waiting for The Departure.
 
As a rural mechanic once said to my college roommate after working on his 1962 Ford Falcon and returning it with the horn wired to the turn signal, "That 'lectricity, it's tricky stuff".

The spirits travel in the wires.
(Saw it on Twin Peaks.)
 
Last edited:
Great idea!
Better a Youtube channel in which I go around to where people are dying and wait for something to happen to make paranormal of.
That could spin into a TV series:
Death Watch: Waiting for The Departure.

Yeah sorry, I am old. YouTubing is what you kids these do days isn’t it.
 
...Also his forehead was growing cooler...

...No more than two or three minutes passed between the first check when he still appeared to be breathing and the second when he was done.

You don't see an anomaly there?
 
Great post :) The way you have described is witty :)

Well, a week ago I had a "strange" experience as well. But not with the dead people :)

My family has a cottage some 35 miles away from the city where I live. It is a one road village with a basic street light so during the night you can barely see what is happening in a neighbor yard. So, I was having a summer night walk with my kid. It was nice as cricket song was relaxing to hear and a neighbor was calling her dog. As we passed her house some 50 meters away from it there was an empty one. No lights were on and there was no car parked in front of it. I thought that there was no one at the home. When suddenly I heard voices coming form the inside of the house for a brief moment. It was strange, even my son was puzzled. Woo-woo side of my personality started to ask strange question: "How is that possible, no one is at the home but I can hear voices?". Than I started to think about normal complicated explanations such as it was probably just an echo of the neighbor who was looking for her dog. I went back to my cottage thinking about strange voices. Next morning I decided to do one more walk toward the house where I heard voices. When I got there the mystery was solved. The owners car was parked opposite to the house, some 20 meters away from the road, in the yard of the abandoned house. Because of bad street lights I couldn't see the car the previous night.

This "mystery" was a no brainer, but it made me think how easy is to trick yourself in thinking that something uncanny has happened. Add to that a believer mentality and everything goes :)
 
Last edited:
This "mystery" was a no brainer, but it made me think how easy is to trick yourself in thinking that something uncanny has happened. Add to that a believer mentality and everything goes :)

I doubt anyone gets through life without some out of the ordinary anecdotal experiences. The more they defy simple explanations; the more they are uncanny to the one who experiences them, the more prone one will be to attach a fantastical narrative.

Emotive narrative seems to me to be our evolutionary default. It's been only recent times in the Human experience that we've begun to cultivate a rational and scientific approach. Most of us will attach and mold the anecdote into a sensational narrative.

And then people cling to their wonderful narratives and can't understand why others don't see the same thing they thought they saw.

Gosh! a life of signs and wonders feels more attractive to me than mundane explanations. That Fairies, the Gods, or Space Aliens could be messing with me gives my life a kind of excitement. I'm not ordinary!

But at the end of the day, I'd rather not run with the fantasies but just sit with reality cause it's cool enough as it is.

In my over 15 years at The JREF/ISF I've seen number of people with their personal fantasies come and go. There was the one who thought they saw the fossils of gargantuan dragons in various geological formations. There was another who claimed the ancients had modern mathematics because one could construct complex geometrical shapes from the layout of ruins. That person was unable to see that they were building up a diagram of something that wasn't there. Another found revelations of the "Corn Gods" by using numerology. They couldn't see their own process of imaginative interpretation. There was a long running thread by an individual who claimed a new mathematics to replace all of what we now use. He was impervious to being shown that his approach was unable to yield anything but a fuzzy arithmetic. All had little awareness of their own imaginative/creative process and couldn't see what was objectively there apart from their narration and construction. They all left with a huff (except the last guy who mostly became inactive because life became more exciting for him than his fantasy: he got married.) because no one here had the mental or spiritual capacity to get their wonderful constructions.

The most wonderful constructions we make for ourselves are our egos. And it's a near futile task to try to pry a person from their precious persona and the crap its made of.
 
Last edited:
Do you suppose that an enterprising person could, using the archives of this and other skeptical fora, write a paper on internet crank behavior? I suggest using forum material because it's interactive: the eccentric confronts his critics and deals with them within forum rules. That's different from the crank's frequently unopposed ramblings on his own blog or newsletter.

I think that the outlines of a syndrome would emerge. The symptoms would almost invariably include hostility soon after critics' first questions were asked and their first doubts raised. Defensive hostility? Yes; but soon it would turn into rage, scorn, and defiant self-inflation.

Or so it seems to me, after lo my long years on this forum.
 
Do you suppose that an enterprising person could, using the archives of this and other skeptical fora, write a paper on internet crank behavior? I suggest using forum material because it's interactive: the eccentric confronts his critics and deals with them within forum rules. That's different from the crank's frequently unopposed ramblings on his own blog or newsletter.

I think that the outlines of a syndrome would emerge. The symptoms would almost invariably include hostility soon after critics' first questions were asked and their first doubts raised. Defensive hostility? Yes; but soon it would turn into rage, scorn, and defiant self-inflation.

Or so it seems to me, after lo my long years on this forum.

I've seen that over and over too.
Yes. There's a rich academic mine waiting for the digging.
 
I've seen that over and over too.
Yes. There's a rich academic mine waiting for the digging.

Yes right back! The psychology of crankism is surely interesting enough to have generated a literature. Now I'm going to look into it more. (We live in a very heaven for layabout "scholars" and "researchers" who can loll around tapping a screen while munching snacks. My people!)

How about a sociology of cranks? Do they cluster by class, income, misfortune? Are some countries friendlier to them than others? Do crackpots tend to be loners and outliers, or can they be found in identifiable subcultures?

I'm not a sociologist, but neither do I disparage the discipline, as is fashionable in some circles. Does that make me a crank? Damfino.
 
It’s an interesing question! It seems to me that some fantasists emerge from, basically, wanting to do legit enquiry into the things they perceive, but misunderstanding or mistrusting the more scientific paradigms of investigation. Sometimes they feel ‘science’ is inherently hostile to what they are into; sometimes they think science breaks or isnt’t good at investigating what they are into.
 
It’s an interesing question! It seems to me that some fantasists emerge from, basically, wanting to do legit enquiry into the things they perceive, but misunderstanding or mistrusting the more scientific paradigms of investigation. Sometimes they feel ‘science’ is inherently hostile to what they are into; sometimes they think science breaks or isnt’t good at investigating what they are into.

Or, I've seen some play it both ways: continue to insist they are being scientific and in the other breath telling you Science is limited and flawed.
"Creation Science" is such a thing.

And with that there's a belief that "experts can't be trusted."
So, here, they encounter other posters who know way more about the science or history, and want to argue with them as if they were noobs.

I've experienced the draw and enchantment of that thing that makes you special. When I first got into "Energy Healing," I felt I'd found my "super power." Then you have an irrational motivation to cling to your superstition while wanting it to be Science.
 
One common factor in a lot of this stuff is the conviction that one's own intuition and subjective experiences are the most reliable guide to reality there is, even if decades of painstaking scientific research contradict them. The people who relativity doesn't make sense to, who took a homeopathic remedy and felt better the next day, who experienced a highly unlikely coincidence etc. It never seems possible to convince them that their own perceptions and thought processes might not be 100% reliable.
 
One common factor in a lot of this stuff is the conviction that one's own intuition and subjective experiences are the most reliable guide to reality there is, even if decades of painstaking scientific research contradict them. The people who relativity doesn't make sense to, who took a homeopathic remedy and felt better the next day, who experienced a highly unlikely coincidence etc. It never seems possible to convince them that their own perceptions and thought processes might not be 100% reliable.

My personal faviorite is the "sugar rush."
The science on this is that it's an anecdotally based myth.
But inasmuch as I get hyped (and even a little horny) from some sugar consumption, I doubt the science.

I was into Reiki and the like for about a decade, during which placebo, confirmation bias, and my own personal experiences reinforced for me the notion of a chi, ki, or life-force. How could ki not be real since I felt it myself?

But as I practiced and observed, I began to see how I was fooling myself.
Go ahead and take the subjective experiences seriously, seriously enough to examine them for what they actually are rather than what they're made out to be.

The obstacle is that we generally want to be right and don't like the notion that we are or could be wrong about ourselves.

Science is a humbling process.
 
There's another piece of the my revelation story.
It's called "Independent Thinking."
It sounds good on the surface, because so many laudable independent thinkers have propelled progress in Science and other fields.

Isaac Newton for example. I give him as an example, because he said of his work that he "stood on the shoulders of giants" to achieve it.
Science is a collaborative discipline, Not so "libertarian" individually centered as cranks and crackpots consider virtuous.

They not only fail at sound and critical thinking, but they make their stand-alone process the final word. If others can't see it or reproduce it, it's their failure, while the extraordinary individual is lauded for marching to the beat of a different drum.

It's exciting to trek out into the fringe wilderness off the map of consensus. To even get lost because you throw away the map others have drawn. It's invigorating to get way out there on a mountaintop. Never mind that its a mountain of dung. You got there all by yourself with no one to tell you what to think.

I have a Bible waving, conservative friend who is a high school teacher. He makes of Evolution a matter of when we should teach "Independent Thinking." "Teach the controversy!" he says.

I tell him there is no scientific controversy. That evolution happens is no more controversial than gravity. Offering "Intelligent Design" as an alternative isn't Science instruction but religious philosophy.

But OK, breech the subject. Don't fail though to include the many instances where the biology is too much a flub or stop gap to be anything intelligent. That's where he drops his polemic, till the topic comes round again.

This, in part, answers the question why Evolution is more hotly opposed by religious cranks now than it was in Darwin's day (not that there was no controversy then.) It's now established Science and more glorious to make a target of one's war against the "Establishment"

If the establishment says there's no evidence of life after death, that's taken as evidence, because Science is just the dogma of the elites. It's some kind of "socialism." The intellectual hero breaks free of its "tyranny."
 

Back
Top Bottom