Is The Book Beyond Deceitful?

Stephanie Greenham.  Desmond wrote, earlier in this blog, “The international skeptics have accosted me because ‘communication with so-called dead spirits is not scientifically provable.  Therefore the claim is nothing more than deceit.  We do not condone deceit’.”


Having faced skepticism from people I love and respect within my family group, and from favourite colleagues and some friends, for most of my life, I nevertheless continue to share my opinions and experiences.  Each and every experience we have with spirit is an amazing gift that is 1000% real for that person.  It’s as real as getting up in the morning, watching a sunset, cuddling a small child.  My question is simple.  How can any skeptic scientifically prove a person’s shared experience of spirit is deceitful?  Although skeptics have their own rights, and energy and thoughts around the phenomenon, if they are not open to what is presented to them, perhaps they are looking in the wrong direction.  Spirit can contact us in such subtle ways:  The presence of a beautiful scent, that stops you in your tracks whilst gardening alone, although the magnificent rose you purchased has no scent.  Weeks after the family dog passes away, you sense and smell your beloved pet.


Other delicate energies can take the form of visions, messages within dreams.  I have three children, and years after they arrived I dreamt I gave birth to a baby boy.  It was so vivid.  This was 10 years after a tubal ligation, so I knew the message was not directed to me.  A week or so later my daughter confirmed her pregnancy, and in due course my wonderful grandson, Jesse, was born.  Other less subtle encounters can also be presented to us.


All we can ever do is smile and share this gift that has so generously been handed to us, and keep loving the skeptic, and wish and hope he or she benefits as we have benefitted.  This is not deceit.  Love you my uncle, who himself has attended NZ Skeptics seminars.


Jean Douglas (White Buffalo Woman) channeled the following lines from spirit for me (Stephanie).

All is Learning all is moving on

All is perfection at each moment in your time in your creation

Our journey at this time is not to try and change another, no matter

what you may believe is best for them for it may not be their journey,

but to be the very best that each one of you can be on your journey

at this time in this life that you have chosen to learn

Your soul energy chose knowing the best journey for you to take to

create the best circumstances with the best people, friends and family

for you to create and to learn the best way in this Earth life journey

for you to move on, on your spiritual pathway. 

Channeled and given through the hand of Jean Douglas (White Buffalo Woman)


DES:  A skeptic cannot prove anything, because we all create our own unique belief structure driven by our own unique needs.  We are all different.  Furthermore it could be asked how the so-called scientific skeptic differs from the Buddhist, or the conservative Christian, or the Muslim, or the Zoroastrian, or the Theosophist, or the Rosicrucianist.  He does not differ.  Simplistically they all believe they are right and everyone else is wrong.  This is a very comfortable space to occupy, even a very lazy space.


One could argue there is a shade of difference between the skeptic and the others, a delicate nuance, because only the skeptic claims to be supported by an irrefutable, replicated consensus of proof:  “Proof is proof.  Facts are facts.  Science is science.”


So … We have already looked at sub-atomic physics, a field in which the leading edge of scientific enquiry relies on a framework of theories supporting theories supporting theories – none of them independently provable.  Therefore this branch of science is broadly accepted, even in the absence of definitive evidence.  Extrapolation is not definitive evidence.  But let us be fair, and go back several generation to language most people understand.  The most respected scientists in the world are instructing the community about blowflies.  The scientists’ authority is unquestioned.  Their credentials are impeccable:  “It has been proven that blowflies are produced from rotting meat.  As it breaks down, eggs and then maggots form within the decaying matter, and give rise to adult flies.  This is where blowflies come from.  A natural cycle of life can therefore be seen creating itself.”  Another claim that was paraded before the world as absolute and undeniable, was that no human being, throughout the history of the species, would ever travel at a speed exceeding 25 miles an hour (I have seen various figures quoted, all below 100 miles an hour), because to do so would crush the cardiovascular system and cause death.


Of course these assertions are rubbish.  As time passes and science evolves, other “facts” come and go, trumpeted as true and proven, only to be discarded as more modern principles and techniques take their place.  And so on.  Common sense tells us this will continue.  In fact there is no such thing as unchangeable scientific proof.  What is revered as an unshakable reality today will be derided as a pitiful joke by the next generation or the one after that.


As a result skeptics, who are blind to this fact, are accused of either arrogance or stupidity by a large percent of the world’s population.  But I think this is unkind.  The critics themselves are usually members of one religion or another, and typically make exactly the same claim:  “We are right and everyone else is wrong.”


Perhaps we should support and encourage those who disagree with us, and celebrate the fact they draw comfort and meaning from their interpretation of the truth:  “If they are happy I am happy for them.  It’s okay to have different opinions.”  But the foregoing is merely my view!