A book for the cynics and skeptics. The AfterLife Experiments -Gary Schwartz Phd.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Would you read a book that proved the afterlife existed based on scientific findings?

  • I believe in an afterlife and I want to read this book

    Votes: 8 40.0%
  • I don't believe in an afterlife and think the guy has been bamboozled

    Votes: 6 30.0%
  • I don't really believe but can change my mind

    Votes: 4 20.0%
  • Nope nothing will change my mind.

    Votes: 2 10.0%

  • Total voters
    20
so..are you guys going to read it then?

"But it may be fraud to suggest that he has used scientific process to come to his conclusions"

Beli,

Judging by your posts if you read this book, you will not think the fellow a fraud.
As a scientist that was one of his main concerns.
He wanted legitimate experiments, and would take whatever results came.
He performed legimate experiments, and was startled by the results.
Until you read the book, you won't be able to make a fair minded assesment.

db9
:)
 
Last edited:
because the afterlife is endless while this life is finite, and most ppl have a yearning to know where they will be spending eternity and how they will be spending that eternity.

db9
 
Last edited:
In one of your earlier posts you wrote about Dr Schwartz in the past tense. Does this mean he is dead? If he is, I guess then he knows for sure whether or not his scientific experiments are legitimate.

"Scientist" covers a huge number of specialities. Are his qualifications listed in the book?
 
if the afterlife can be measured and tested in human terms, just how special is it anyway?

seems to me this guy is selling a way to "prove" what those who would purchase such a book already believe.

whatever makes you feel better, i suppose. can't see the harm in this, nor in pet psychics.
 
I heard him on the radio around christmas time, I think it was an NPR broadcast over our ABC newsradio, anyhow the theory being that we give off our information and it goes out into space and that information keeps up alive ~ it was not scientific. To date there has not been one peer reviewed and published paper that could conclusively demonstrate an afterlife. The search for the divine is a matter of faith, attempting to bridge the gap between science and faith just yields poor science and faith.
 
tania
irvine
wanderer


i don't want to give away the details of the book.
when i spoke of gary schwartz in the past tense, i referred to the data in the book.

he took painful astringents in making the expirements legitimate.
he exposed fradulent mediums which are a dime a dozen and explain their methods.

With legitmate mediums he used them and had normal ppl sit quietly/silently behind partions and filmed these readings.

one of many many examples in the book:

so when a legitimate medium that is not conversing with a participant, cannot see the participant and starts telling that participant that "hey what im seeing about you is this":

'a mother figure
a mother figure at your wedding
a mother figure at your wedding w a ring of daisies
w a 'Y'
like "Yollie or Yolanda"
This mother figure says that she is no longer ill.
that she can breath much better now
and she pointing at her lungs now, saying she's ok.

and she is saying that she loves you and she's proud of the mother that you have become..;

And then the participant reveals that
YES-

1. Her deceased mother was Yolanda but went by Yollie
2.Even though most weddings have roses or carnations but her mom was fond of dasies and even made her a wreath of dasies that the daughter wore in her hair on her wedding day, and dasies were the flowers at her wedding-which is uncommon.

3. That her mother was ill for a long time
4 That her mother had difficulty breathing
5 that her mother died of lung cancer
6 that the participant)(sitter) was ever wondering if she would be as good a mother as her own.


And there were strict controls where the mediums never corresponded with the participants prior to the readings.
Strict controls as these were silent readings while the particpants said nothing as the mediums obtained information from the other side.


Each medium read about 6 different ppl and the level of accuracy was astounding.

Other parts of the book address the fradulent mediums and what their metrhods are. The fradulent mediums are exposed.

So if you have an open mind read the book.
The readings by the legitimate mediums were recorded for a HBO special too, so maybe you can rent the video if you're genuinely interested.

db9
 
Last edited:
well the more credible and strict experiments that were done by world rennowned mediums the more the results were validated.

you have to realize the scientist was a reluctant and a skeptical witness going in and was out to report the results accurately.
he was surprised by the results.

this is what makes the book so fascinating and compelling.

db9
 
Last edited:
So-called Mediums are very good at reading people's reactions, which is how they manage to give vaguely correct information to the relatives/friends of the deceased.

I would like to encourage you to look up Derren Brown who is a psychologist. In one of his programs, he investigated Mediums and Psychics and just showed how fraudulent they are. I would like to be able to explain this better, but sadly I can't remember exactly what happened and my understanding of psychology isn't that great. Essentially, he claimed to be a Medium and spoke to people he'd never met before and was able to tell them things about a deceased relative or friend, without knowing anything about them. He did this purely by reading the person's reactions as he spoke to them.

I'm not completely out ruling the possibility that there may be people who have some sort of connection, for want of a better word, with the dead, I just believe it is highly unlikely.

I also would question the reliability and credibility of this man's "research". Just because someone has the letters Dr before their name and PhD after it doesn't immediately mean that anything they write or do research into is going to be accurate.

I would like to site a lecturer who many years ago worked and taught in the Maths department at my University. He once published a book which had some absolute mathematical nonsense in it, which he claimed to be correct. There's no point trying to explain it here because unless you are degree level mathematicians, it won't mean anything to you. Essentially, he may as well have said 2x2 = 12. And this from a Dr. With those fancy PhD letters after his name.

So, I won't be buying the book because it would be a waste of money I don't have and further, I won't be looking for it in any libraries because I have far better things to be doing with my time.

Like writing stupidly long posts like this.
 
umm ok.

:wink:

db9

QUOTES
"Science meets spiritualism
in this extraordinarily precise and detailed chronicle of experiments.
It is one of the most important books written on this subject."
James Van Praagh
Spiritual medium and author of Talking to Heaven

"Professor Schwartz exhibits courage and integrity
- in his groundbreaking experiments.
This book ... is an important milestone in the scientific research
on the survival of consciousness after physical death."
Richard C. Powell
Vice president for research and graduate studies,
University of Arizona

"A compelling read,
this book supports with real evidence the existence of a spirit world
that many assumed was there, but may now embrace beyond reasonable doubt."
George E. Dalzell, L.C.S.W.
Author of Messages: Evidence for Life After Death

"[A] painstakingly assembled hypothesis
followed by rigorous experimentation.
Dr. Schwartz has made his case - compellingly in my view."
Rustum Roy
Evan Pugh Professor of the Solid State and professor of geochemistry,
Pennsylvania State University

"Anyone who has ever questioned life after death
must read THE AFTERLIFE EXPERIMENTS.
Dr. Schwartz's work finally closes the gulf in our understanding of life and death."
Joel Rothschild
Author of Signals

"Gary Schwartz navigates his readers
on a journey of discovery.
At last we can take another collective step toward affirming
that life and love survive physical death ...Thanks, Gary!"
Judy Guggenheim
After-death communication researcher and co-author of Hello From Heaven!

"Dr. Schwartz perfectly blends
the academic principles of science with the abstract possibilities of spirituality,
searching to answer the age-old question of what happens after we die.
This book is [a] must-read and must-own ...
or anyone who struggles with faith, love, death, and aspects of divinity."
John Edward, host of Crossing Over With John Edward
and author of Crossing Over: The Stories Behind the Stories
 
Last edited:
dandy said:
i don't think any of us will know for sure until we've left the planet, regardless of what books we've read.

Exactly. Ditto this post, too:

Originally posted by DrTeeth
Seriously, I have an open mind regarding the possibility of an afterlife. I just don't believe anybody can prove that it is or isn't there.

I personally do believe there's an afterlife of some kind, but I'm not about to try and make people agree with me. If someone isn't interested in worrying about the afterlife or whatever, leave 'em be. Same goes with those who do believe in an afterlife-that's their choice, and they should be left alone also.

Angela
 
yes Angela correct but this book is more for the openminded fence sitters who may appreciate data contained here.

db9

:)
 
Last edited:
Was your last post a reply to mine? It seems as though you are trying to suggest that lots of people say how wonderful and accurate this book is. Sadly, this list isn't really conclusive proof that anything in the book is accurate. I could read the book and say

"Gary Schwartz navigates his readers on a journey of discovery. At last we can take another collective step toward affirming that life and love survive physical death ...Thanks, Gary!"

as Judy Guggenheim did. However, this doesn't mean what is in the book is accurate in any way, shape or form.

Many poeple love The Da Vinci Code and would recommend it as an excellent book to read. But as we know, the "facts" in this book are, if not outright lies, certainly very much questionable. Something being praised doesn't mean it's correct.

The only way something can be concisively proved to be correct is if the same outcome or predicted outcome occurs everytime; if a theory can be proved to be correct for every possible instance.
 
mtoreilly


than i would encourage you to read the book and make up your own mind.

there is far more evidence that there is life after death than say that Neptune exists.

all we have are pictures of a planet that scientists claim to be Neptune.

in this book we have a lot more evidence that their is an afterlife based on the expirements, the way the experiments were conducted, the initail dispostion of the experimentor.

this is what makes the book compelling.

and until one reads the book I dont think one should dismiss it.

as far as Dan Brown and his books Davinci Code and Demons and Angels I found both to be intersting reads.

Well researched data but both only well written fictional novels.

db9
 
Last edited:
:hmm:

i think one can be a skeptical fence sitter waiting to be convinced..
like say maybe an apostle named Thomas:ohmy:

db9
:wink:
 
I have made up my mind. I'm a Roman Catholic and I believe in life after death. Key word, believe.

I don't know for a fact that it exists, but I believe it does. This is the point in faith, and something people very often fail to grasp. You can't prove the existence of God, but I believe he exists, in the same way you can't prove there is an afterlife, merely believe whether it exists or not.

As for your argument about Neptune - what utter nonsense! We know that there is an object in space, which we classify as a planet and have named Neptune, many millions of miles away from our planet, that also orbits our Sun. The reason we know it is there is because you can see it with telescopes, visual or otherwise.

there is far more evidence that there is life after death than say that Neptune exists.

No, there isn't. There really is irrefutable evidence that Neptune exists. The same cannot be said for an afterlife.

this is what makes the book compelling

Again, it may be compelling, but this does not mean it is true or accurate. Personally, I found The Hobbit compelling to read, but it doesn't mean that it's real.

as far as Dan Brown and his books Davinci Code and Demons and Angels I found both to be intersting reads.

Well researched data but both only well written fictional novels

As with what I have just mentioned about The Hobbit, I was using the book to illustrate the point that just because someone said it was good, it doesn't mean it's right.
 
diamond said:
:hmm:

i think one can be a skeptical fence sitter waiting to be convinced..
like say maybe an apostle named Thomas:ohmy:

db9
:wink:

Thomas wasn't a sceptical fence-sitter. He did not believe that Jesus had risen from the dead until he saw the evidence for himself, at which point, once proved wrong, he believed it.
 
mtoreilly said:
I have made up my mind. I'm a Roman Catholic and I believe in life after death. Key word, believe.

I don't know for a fact that it exists, but I believe it does. This is the point in faith, and something people very often fail to grasp. You can't prove the existence of God, but I believe he exists, in the same way you can't prove there is an afterlife, merely believe whether it exists or not.

As for your argument about Neptune - what utter nonsense! We know that there is an object in space, which we classify as a planet and have named Neptune, many millions of miles away from our planet, that also orbits our Sun. The reason we know it is there is because you can see it with telescopes, visual or otherwise.



No, there isn't. There really is irrefutable evidence that Neptune exists. The same cannot be said for an afterlife.

.

No mtoreilly other than pictures we really don't know.
Unless you and I hop in a rocket, land there and bring back some dirt from that planet we are taking it on faith.

For all we know we could get there in a rocket and it could be a mirage.:ohmy:

As far as claiming I know there is an afterlife, I dont know for certain, but this book reconfirmed my beliefs based on the data collected by a fairminded researcher.

Thomas was a skeptical fence sitter (about Christ's ressurection) when viewing the ressurected Savior (thinking he was only seeing a ghost) until Jesus admonished him. If Thomas wasn't skeptical Jesus wouldn't asked him to feel his wounds.



db9
 
Last edited:
Yes, we really do know that Neptune exists - other than "pictures". That's like saying you didn't believe the ocean was there, even though you could see it, until you actually touched it. Saying pictures is interesting too. Do you call things you see with your eyes pictures? When you look through an optical telescope you can see Neptune. Seeing really is believing to a great extent.

For all we know we could get there in a rocket and it could be a mirage.

Well it would be amazing if it was. Imagine all those thousands of people seeing exactly the same mirage over a period of 160 years. Here's some mathematical evidence that Neptune exists:

Neptune was the first planet to be discovered by using mathematics. After the discovery of Uranus in 1781, astronomers noticed that the planet was being pulled slightly out of its normal orbit. John Couch Adams of Britain and Urbain Jean Joseph Leverrier of France, used mathematics to predict that the gravity from another planet beyond Uranus was affecting the orbit of Uranus. They figured out not only where the planet was, but also how much mass it had. A young astronomer, Johann Gottfried Galle, decided to search for the predicted planet and observed Neptune for the first time in 1846.

So there we go, Neptune was discovered using maths about 60 years before it was ever seen.

As far as claiming I know there is an afterlife, I dont know for certain, but this book reconfirmed my beliefs based on the data collected by a fairminded researcher.

Well this is a different tact to your other posts. In these you suggest that this book proves the existence of an afterlife, but here you say that this book just reconfirmed your beliefs, which suggests that it doesn't prove anything.

You also keep saying that Gary Schwartz is 'a fair-minded researcher'. That doesn't make the findings of his research accurate or true! One can be completely fair-minded about things when researching something or experimenting, but it doesn't imply that your findings are going to be correct.

Thomas was a skeptical fence sitter (about Christ's ressurection) when viewing the ressurected Savior (thinking he was only seeing a ghost) until Jesus admonished him. If Thomas wasn't skeptical Jesus wouldn't asked him to feel his wounds.

He wasn't sceptical, he simply did not believe Jesus was alive. A fence sitter is someone who is undecided either way. Thomas was decided, in that he believed Jesus to be dead. He would not accept that Jesus was alive. The reason Jesus asked Thomas to feel his wounds was because it was the proof Thomas had said he needed before he would believe that Jesus was alive.
 
What? we know Neptune exists because we observed it's gravitational influence on Uranus, we can observe it with telescopes and visited it with Voyager II and we will never have dirt from Neptune because it is a gas giant.

It is not faith, faith is saying that something is there and blindly believing it. Scientific method is observing a problem with the motion of another planet and then deducing the existence of another planet and it's movements using mathematics, then testing this theory and observing the predicted planet, and then continue to observe it for over a century and send a probe past the planet.
 
Last edited:
we will never have dirt from Neptune because it is a gas giant

Oh yeah, good point. Thanks, hadn't even occured to me.

I'm glad someone appreciates the difference between fact and faith, belief and proof.
 
can we keep our anuses out of this discussion?:angry:

let's just say i put precedence over the existence of the afterlife over the existence of
Neptune
or anybody's
anus.

thank u
db9:wink:
 
can we keep our anuses out of this discussion?

Huh?

And, I'm not questioning whether you think the existence of an afterlife is more important than the existence of a planet, I'm questioning how you can say that there is more evidence that an afterlife exists than that a huge planet exists?
 
somebody missed my attempt at humor:wink:

seriously based on the data in the book by the author who started out as a skeptic and reluctanly admits based on his research there is an afterlife according to his findings, i'd say i'm almost more convinced there is an afterlife inwhich I havnt seen, than the existence of a planet millions of miles away.

there how's that?

db9
 
So if someone said, "I don't believe that Neptune exists" but then did lots of tests and finally, reluctantly says, "Ok, Neptune does exist" and then wrote a book about it you'd believe it more?

Because, as I read it, that is essentially what you're saying here.
 
I think most people believe studies -- whether they are scientific, political, sociological, etc.--which support their already held points of view. Almost all of the links I've seen here to articles and studies support only the poster's views (only naturally). I've read some of them that didn't support my point of view. Can't say they changed my mind, because I either countered them in my own head with the other information I had or didn't have the information from the other side to balance the study. That being said, Diamond, I'll look at the book if I can find it in the library.
 
I think the problem with this thread is the audience to which it was pitched. Diamond, you have successfully attracted the cynics and skeptics. Unfortunately that is not the target market for this book.

If you get something out of the book then good for you but I wouldn't expect to 'convert' the cynical with this book.
 
I'm only cynical about how this has been proved, as I don't see how it can be as it is surely a matter of faith. I have already stated that I do believe in an afterlife of some description.
 
Back
Top Bottom