The Truth About Medium(s)
What rigorous scrutiny of professional psychic mediums reveals
⚠️ Experience a “revolutionary healing science expanding the boundaries of being.” (NEXUS magazine) > Discover the unique and life-changing EVOLVE YOURSELF biofield activations. New Ceremony scheduled for Oct 23rd
Read my first book, THE GRAND ILLUSION: A SYNTHESIS OF SCIENCE & SPIRITUALITY - Book 1 📘 10,000 hours of life-changing research—distilled
With a paid Substack subscription to get FULL Substack access (includes all audio 🎧 versions + comments on all pieces)
Thanks in advance for supporting.
Just the facts, Ma’am
Harvard-trained psychologist, Dr Gary E. Schwartz, has conducted rigorously controlled research for some twenty years with an exceptional collection of mediums, including George Anderson, John Edward, Allison DuBois, Susy Smith, Suzanne Northrop, and Mary Occhino, to name just a handful.
In his 2005 book, The Truth About Medium, he reported that this high-quality group of gifted mediums had been tested under conditions that ruled out the use of fraud and cold reading techniques frequently employed by mental magicians and “psychic entertainers.1”
Schwartz went as far as employing strict triple-blind protocols in order to insure against any kind of fraud.
Briefly, this approach means the mediums are blind to the identities of the sitters (the person being “read”) and their deceased loved ones (Blind #1). The sitters are blind to which readings are theirs (Blind #2), meaning the sitter is not actually present during the reading—instead, the experimenter serves as a proxy sitter for them—the information is transcribed and scored by the sitter later. The experimenter is blind to the identities of the sitters as well as specific information about their deceased loves ones (Blind #3).
This is an insane level of protection against funny business.
In this setup, the sitter receives two different readings—one is the reading conducted on their behalf and the other is someone else’s. They are not told which is which and must carefully rate each item of each reading for accuracy as it may apply to them, and finally must guess which reading was indeed theirs.2
Based on the results of such experiments, Schwartz wrote that,
“Mediums like Allison [DuBois] can, under appropriate laboratory conditions, generate data that cannot be explained as fraud, subtle cuing, rater bias, experimentor error, or even mind-reading of the physically alive. The evidence strongly points to the existence of the ‘physically challenged’—the discarnates, sometimes called spirits—as providing much of this information.3”
As Schwartz points out, when the artificiality of the laboratory replicates real-life phenomena for a given medium, it logically follows that we should treat the real-life phenomena for that medium as genuine.4
Double-blind and single-blind readings by DuBois for Veronica Keen, wife of the late parapsychologist Montague Keen, were conducted not long after Keen passed away from heart failure in 2004. These were designed to retrieve information from the discarnate Keen that supported the survival hypothesis, and were evidently initiated by Keen himself after he had apparently made contact with his wife through several mediums in the UK, requesting that Schwartz conduct research to prove he was “still here.5”
DuBois’ data impressed Keen’s widow so much that she concluded that Allison DuBois was one of the very best mediums she had experienced in her years of being involved with mediums both before and after her husband’s death.6 DuBois is a professional psychic profiler who psychically taps people’s minds for a living, communicates with the dead, and assists police in missing persons cases (for free), so her superlative performance should not surprise anyone.7
She is the real life medium upon which the hit TV show Medium was based.
Montague Keen had dropped dead of a heart attack whilst mid-sentence at the podium at a meeting held at the Royal Society of Arts. Rupert Sheldrake had just presented research on telepathy and had been attacked by a “supersceptic” (translation: pseudosceptic) when Keen spoke up in his defence and suddenly collapsed without warning.
(Incidentally, DuBois states that, “sceptics tend to have an energy that is vile and repelling,”8 which is another way of saying they have no shortage of unresolved psychological issues and loads of inner work to do.)
During a reading, Schwartz had asked DuBois if the discarnate (Keen) could show her any images. DuBois—not knowing who she was reading for—responded:
...he’s showing a man falling at the podium. Like [snaps her fingers]. Like [snaps her fingers again] and falls, and he goes down at the podium... this is important. So like an assembly. And he goes down at the podium…That’s what he’s showing. The man that died at the podium…He’s making me feel like he either had a heart attack or [snapping her fingers] his breath was taken from him. But he’s showing his knees buckling and going down…9
Technically, Keen was in front of the podium, not “at” the podium, but clearly an intelligent information exchange and communication is taking place here. DuBois provided further specific and personal data points referring to Keen’s relationship with Schwartz, Keen’s personality and mannerisms, as well as communicating Keen’s own assessment of her work.
When Schwartz asked “What does he think about you? Is he pleased with what you’ve done to date?” DuBois stated: “Uh, yes. He is. He’s showing the ‘white crow’ as being important. And to go back to the white crow.10”
DuBois was oblivious to the profound symbolism being conveyed through her.
As researchers of “the paranormal,” Keen, Schwartz and all of their colleagues’ investigations had been aimed at verifying the existence of, and studying, William James’ metaphorical white crow(s)—people with real psi abilities. James had stated: “If you wish to upset the law that all crows are black, you must not seek to show that no crows are; it is enough if you prove one single crow to be white.”
The inference is clear: Keen was saying that DuBois is herself a white crow.
Though as a child she was taught to believe in an ethereal and abstractly described heaven, complete with many rules for proper entry, DuBois’ innate abilities shone through and she would plainly see people who had died all around her.11
These studies feature an intriguing element: they are designed in such a way that the discarnate is to be alerted to or collected for the reading by... another discarnate, or “guide.” That is how “blind” these experiments are. The fact that they were successful supports both the “survival” hypothesis, telepathic communication with spirits, and less directly, the notion of spirit guides found in Spiritualism and related schools.
That the “deceased” can detect our thoughts if they intend to, or if strong enough emotion or intention is mustered on our behalf to get their attention is well known. It is commonly emphasised by legitimate seers, mediums, and esotericists, and makes sense given that, unencumbered by the physical senses, the personality functioning through the plasma-like astral or mental body has its locus of awareness situated in the “vehicles” most responsible for thinking and feeling, and thus telepathic/nonverbal communication. Of course they can hear your thoughts. (Just don’t assume they are necessarily all that interested in the quotidian minutiae of your life.) One caveat on this point regards earthbound (EB) souls, which apparently don’t do so well in the mind-reading department—more on EBs later (in Book 2).
Later mediumship experiments by Schwartz et al. were conducted double-blind and long distance, where the sitters could not be seen by the mediums and also did not speak. Accurate and specific information was obtained by this select group of mediums regardless. Replication over distance was achieved. Findings reported in Scotland by Robertson and Roy (2001) independently replicated and extended these findings and further falsified the “generalisation hypothesis” (that mediums just proffer up general information that could apply to virtually anyone) with astronomical odds against chance of 5.37 x 10-11.12
For what it’s worth, I categorically agree with Schwartz’ view that DuBois and other research mediums are more genuine and real than the professional (pseudo)sceptics who deride and dismiss them13.
As for the work done by Robertson and Roy at the University of Glasgow, British medium Gordon Smith performed with the greatest accuracy of anyone tested. He achieved an incredible 98% success rate with his information deemed specific and accurate under the tight experimental protocol.
One of Smith’s most impressive real world cases of mediumship concerns the appearance of a male spirit called Blake who had gone missing and not been found. Blake identified himself to Smith and revealed he had been a soldier training in France when, after a night out, he had been accidentally killed. He described to Smith the river where his body now lay. All personal details were correct. A year later, a human thigh bone was found in the exact place where Blake had told Smith he would be. DNA tests reportedly confirmed the identity.14 (We’re not getting into the nitty gritty of the validity of DNA tests here.)
We can therefore see that a discarnate being is potentially capable of intervening in our world and influencing the outcome of, for example, a police investigation, when they can communicate with someone who has developed the capacity for perceiving and understanding them.
This has been shared in popular media in shows such as “Psychic Detectives.” In an unsolved murder case that had been cold for twelve years, psychic Kay Rhea had initially used only a photograph of the victim (a Hispanic woman) to derive detailed information about the killer, including his appearance, and his relation to the woman. The resulting sketch was held on file for a dozen years with no progress before the case lurched forward again. After the sketch was released to the public, a tip given to police led swiftly to the man’s arrest. Within two hours of being detained he confessed to the murder: they were having an affair and he killed her when she threatened to confess to his wife. All of this was previously detected by Rhea intuitively and all was verified. The arrest was made possible by the twelve-year-old sketch based on her psychically derived description of the suspect.15
Four major classes of apparent “discarnate intention events” that emerged in Schwartz’ research are:
Drop-Ins—Evidential information regarding unanticipated, uninvited, and sometimes unknown individuals who appear in specific readings;
Interruptions—Evidential information that interrupts experimenter-initiated questions
Cross-Correspondence—Evidential information that fits across readings as well as within readings; and
Selective Withholding of Information—Evidential information that appears to be intentionally withheld across and within readings.16
Schwartz’ earlier book The Afterlife Experiments (2002) extensively details much of the research done involving his “Dream Team” (his words) of chosen mediums for those wanting to get into the nuts and bolts of the experimental setups he and his colleagues designed—and the astonishing results they yielded. The devout “sceptics” have no rebuttal for that data, which was obtained under some of the most stringently controlled conditions ever imposed on mediums. The papers published by the PRISM (Psychical Research Involving Selected Mediums) program validate mediumship showing effects with odds against chance of ten billion to one.17
Dead Or Alive?: To test whether mediums could actually detect whether a person is dead or alive just by looking at a photograph, Dean Radin and colleagues invited twelve professional mediums to their lab to test the notion. While five of the dozen obtained statistically significant results, and nine overall had results in a positive direction, accuracy levels for this group were not spectacular. The most interesting finding regarding accuracy was that the mediums had more success with recently deceased people—the longer the person in the photo had been dead, the less successful they were. Perhaps when mediums in such situations state that the person no longer “feels” dead, it is because that person’s “soul” has “incarnated” (become associated with another physical body) once again, and thus, they “feel (more) alive” to the medium—though that is mere speculation.
Probably more significant was the fact that 100 milliseconds after the photo was displayed to a medium—before they could consciously decide how to respond—their brains showed different electrical patterns when they got a right answer than when they were wrong. As Radin notices, this suggests real mediums are unconsciously sensitive to something (information) that provides a clue as to the life status of the person in a photo.18
Unusual Brain States: To specifically address whether mediums entered into unusual brain states during communication with the dead, Radin and his colleagues recruited six professional mediums already vetted by the Windbridge Institute. The task was twofold. First mediums were given the name of someone deceased and asked twenty-five questions about them, including when they were alive, personality type, hobbies, cause of death, and so on. After each question the medium was given twenty seconds to silently gain information and then talk about it. Importantly, both the mediums and the experimenters were blind to the identity of the deceased person, and nor did they interact with the sitter (a proxy sitter not connected to the deceased was used), eliminating any possibility of cold reading.
Each medium would read two deceased people. Later the genuine sitter who actually knew the deceased would receive a transcription of not one but two of the medium’s readings—with names of the deceased removed—and then score each for accuracy. Sitter ratings were returned for four of the six mediums, with all four scoring positively, and three significantly above chance. One medium was highly accurate with odds against chance of 20,000 to 1.
The second part of the task involved each medium being asked to experience four different states of mind: (1) recollection (thinking about a living person they knew), (2) perception (listening to an experimenter describe someone they didn’t know), (3) fabrication (imagining a person), and (4) mediumship (mentally interacting with a deceased person). The electrical activity in the brains of the mediums was “significantly different” when they were functioning mediumistically, as compared to the other three brain states. The researchers concluded, “the experience of communicating with the deceased may be a distinct mental state…19”
No surprises there then.
The Double-Deceased Paradigm
Another variation on Schwartz’ blinded spirit experiments is what he calls the “double-deceased” paradigm—and it has been employed repeatedly with success.
In simple terms, one “deceased” person brings another discarnate to a medium under blinded conditions in order to communicate.
Case in point: in September of 2017, Schwartz and his wife Rhonda, a selective research medium, were prepping to head to Scottsdale, Arizona for an afterlife conference. Rhonda communicated with the now deceased medium Susy Smith and requested that Susy locate Whitley Strieber’s late wife Anne in the spirit world and then bring her to two different evidential mediums who would also be presenting at the conference. Rhonda sensed Susy would try to do so, and Schwartz notes that Susy has successfully worked within the double-deceased paradigm using the same two mediums on multiple occasions.
In this case, significantly evidential information was indeed produced by the medium/s. Out of a possible 33 points in Schwartz’ rating system, Whitley Strieber scored 27 as “clear hits” or “super hits,” with another four items being “probable,” bringing the tally to an impressive 93.9% accuracy for the medium in question and this particular phase of the contact.20
There is much more to the story than this, however, and much more evidence provided in connection with Anne, as outlined in Schwartz’ foreword to Strieber’s The Afterlife Revolution. As Strieber himself writes, barely two hours following her death in August 2015, Anne “began a methodical process of proving she still exists that has changed my life completely.”21
Anne’s method involved leaving signs and clues intended to undermine Whitley’s pre-existing bias against the very possibility. Strieber is known for his years of contact with what is usually framed (or spun) by others as “aliens,” and he is frank that these non-physical beings—whatever they may be—were responsible for helping he and Anne come back into contact after she died: “They taught us how.” They also taught that our next stage of human evolution will be living with the physical and non-physical sides in conscious contact with each other. Rather than unhelpfully calling them “aliens” or space people, Anne referred to them as “inward beings” who “live within reality,” whereas we humans tend merely to inhabit its surface.22
Personally, I aim to normalise the concept of living much less on the surface and embracing the fullness of who we are; normalising contact with the “other side” is part of that—we are primarily non-physical beings after all. Whitley and Anne received massive volumes of letters from members of the public who often reported that the souls of the deceased often appeared together with the “visitors.”23
Of course it stands to reason that non-physical beings not native to our physical earth life system could seem very “alien” or “other” to us, but this challenge is rooted in our limiting preconceptions and small-minded category obsession. The problem lies with the way we think about these things, not with reality itself, the whole of which is a sort of elaborate hallucination anyway. There is little reason “deceased” humans could not have functional relationships with other non-physical species, once the issue of how to communicate intelligibly (mentally) is sorted. This is vividly demonstrated in OBEr Bruce Moen’s writings on his interactions with a non-physical telepathic race he dubbed rather unpoetically “2ndGathGroup” in his books.24
About Brendan & His Other Offers
Brendan D. Murphy is the “consciousness guy”, afterlife expert, and author of the critically acclaimed epic, “The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science and Spirituality — Book 1”
📕 BOOK 2 IS COMING! Get on the wait list for the astonishing Book 2 of “The Grand Illusion”
⚠️ OVERWORKED BUSINESS OWNERS: Would you love a leveraged way to build income online? Join us for FREEDOM ON TAP
UPGRADE YOURSELF with a “revolutionary healing science expanding the boundaries of being.” (NEXUS magazine) Watch the FREE How to Evolve Yourself (WITHOUT Hard Work or Meditation) Masterclass to learn how this transformative evolutionary biofield activation and healing work with sound can change your world. Watch the webclass to register and save your seat
1 Gary E. Schwartz, The Truth About Medium, 26.
2 Op. Cit., 60-1.
3 See Schwartz, The Truth…, 71.
4 Ibid.
5 Op. Cit., 88.
6 See Schwartz, The Truth…, 90-1.
7 See DuBois, Don’t Kiss Them Goodbye (Fireside, 2005), 22-23.
8 Ibid, 112 and 116.
9 See Schwartz, The Truth…, 92-5.
10 See Schwartz, The Truth…, 96-9.
11 Allison DuBois, We Are Their Heaven, xi
12 Schwartz, p 129. For more detail on Schwartz/Beischel’s experiments and why they eliminate the “fraud” hypothesis, see: Julie Beischel, PhD, and Gary E. Schwartz, PhD, ANOMALOUS INFORMATION RECEPTION BY RESEARCH MEDIUMS DEMONSTRATED USING A NOVEL TRIPLE-BLIND PROTOCOL, in EXPLORE January/February 2007, Vol. 3, No. 1., and see also: Julie Beischel, PhD and Gary E. Schwartz, PhD, Methodological Advances in Laboratory-Based Mediumship Research, Rhine Research Conference: “Consciousness Today” March 23-25, 2007. See also, Laszlo and Currivan, CosMos.
13 For more detailed readings by DuBois, including the effusive assessments and perspectives of some of the sitters she has read for, see her book, We Are Their Heaven.
14 Laszlo and Currivan, CosMos, 151-2.
15 Featured on Psychic Detective on “Bio” on the Fox network, 26 April, 2008. Other verified cases of psychic detective work in crime solving can be found in “Sensing Murder” (hosted by Rebecca Gibney) which focused more on New Zealand.
16 See , Schwartz, The Truth…, 140-1.
17 Piero Calvi-Parisetti, 21 Days into the Afterlife, 51.
18 Radin, Real Magic, 161-2.
19 Ibid., Radin, 165-7.
20 See Strieber, The Afterlife Revolution.
21 See ibid., chapter 1.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 See Moen, Voyages into the Afterlife.