what's this "absolute proof" of yours then?
This piece by Schubert was supposedly transmitted to Rosemary -what do you think of it?
Either Schubert hasn't learnt much in the last nearly 200 years (indeed he seems to have lost some talent), Rosemary was a lousy choice of scribe, or the whole thing is the product of either fraud or an overactive imagination.
It's personal so I can't disclose details -but my sister experienced exactly the same thing - it just defied any normal in the world explanation -and trust me I would find it if there was one -because I have always been such a rationalist.But what do you think of the music?
I can't personally separate the two things. All over the internet there is evidence of the techniques used by supposed psychics and mediums- that regularly startle people but which are altogether explicable. Based on seemingly real experience I'd swear blind I've seen a ghost, but it's something called "old hag syndrome" where the brain is sluggish at making the transition between sleep and being awake. I also have various impossible false memories that I would have sworn blind were true, but which have been disproven beyond all doubt. There a very interesting book about the unconscious by a guy called Mlodinov that I strongly recommend reading. We cannot even afford to trust ourselves, let alone what another person swears is compelling- because there's almost certainly a perfectly rational explanation. Regarding Rosemary Brown, it could scarcely be clearer that it's nonsense. There's some kind of cock and bull explanation about the composer's supposedly had to teach her various things about composition before they could pass their ideas through her and supposedly it was only possible to pass on simpler compositions. There's absolutely no convincing reason to believe that, even if there were proper evidence of communication from beyond, for some reason the spirits of the composers would be limited by her technical ability as a musician. Total hogwash.
I deliberately posted the Schubert, because I too had my doubts regarding this particular piece -though there are lovely moments in it -but there are examples of quite complex music, supposedly transmitted by Liszt which is quite compelling. Those that want to dismiss RB as a fraudster will do so regardless
I would never bother reading Mlodinov -I find people who try to disprove phenomena we don't understand extremely arrogant and often more deluded than the people they dismiss. I have no doubt there are fraudsters and tricksters. However, my experience was not only shared and happened while we were both chatting, far from sleep related -but an impression was also made on my sisters' pet cat -who admittedly was sleeping -but became VERY awake -I would like Mlodinov to explain how an animal is subject to unconscious human syndromes. If two people also experience exactly the same thing at exactly the same time, it is impossible to find a psychological explanation. Something else also occurred which defied the laws of physics -I did experience this second incident alone -but it seemed pretty real to me. Not too long ago I would have been the same as you -wanting very much to dismiss such things as hogwash -it offends our concept of rational reality and a reality we feel comfortable with -but the reality we think we experience is very different from the actual world. Quantum theory alone should alert us to the strangeness of actual reality -why should be surprised at anything? Life itself is not exactly a simple phenomenon is it?I deliberately posted the Schubert, because I too had my doubts regarding this particular piece -though there are lovely moments in it -but there are examples of quite complex music, supposedly transmitted by Liszt which is quite compelling. Those that want to dismiss RB as a fraudster will do so regardless
Mlodinov merely writes about the unconscious in this book. he's not out to prove anything. however it contains an interesting story about a horse that could supposedly do maths. a scientist who went to observe noticed that all the separate humans who it did maths for were unwittingly giving a cue to the horse, that it was merely responding to in a simplistic reponse. things are nor always as they appear. you don't need to believe in mediums to know that animals can be perceptive to emotions or that some can literally smell fear in response to the pheromones that are released. you didn't detail your story, but I doubt if it involves anything beyond a simple explanation. also, given that someone wins the lottery every week (at 16 million to one odds) most "uncanny" coincidences are not terribly remarkable, given how much more unlikely a lottery win is. mind readers consistently fail to achieve anything statically improbable as an average whenever tested over enough time to reasonably gauge their ability. anyway, the book is interesting not because it is out to debunk anything but because it illustrates how flawed memory is. it made me realise I cannot necessarily even trust my own, nevermind anyone else's account. the sheer scope of the brain to distort true events (not as a knowing lie but due to how the brain alters memories over time without conscious awareness) means that neither your account of anything nor anyone else's can be trusted as hard evidence. as I said, my experience of a ghost remains overwhelmingly vivid. that doesn't mean it was real. The day hard documented evidence of something comes up is the day I'll believe in the paranormal.
I seem to recall that the subject of Rosemary Brown's been debated here before but I could be mistaken and I don't have time to check.What surprises me is that a number of distinguished musicians, including composers Humphrey Searle (with whom I studied) and Richard Rodney Bennett, expressed the view that there was something in it. As j_menz has suggested here and many others have done elsewhere, if Brownesque effusions are all that major composers can manage in an "afterlife", then who needs afterlives? Schubert and Liszt are indeed excellent examples of composers who were forging new and interesting paths in their last years; Chopin, with his ever more sophisticated use of counterpoint is another who came to be under the Brown spotlight. Whilst I do not think for one moment that RB did the kind of thing that she did for fame, money or any other dubious motive, I do nevertheless believe that she was at best delusional in terms of what she though she was doing and how it supposedly came about.That said, the notion of "finding" music in the air, so to speak - or somehow accessing it as though it was already there - is nevertheless a phenomenon less easy to dismiss. Stravinsky testified to it, as did Schönberg; Busoni referred to the rôle of the composer as being somewhat more akin to that of a diviner and illustrated this in his Fantasia Contrappuntistica, describing it as "compilata per il pianoforte da Ferruccio Busoni". Elgar famously claimed to have discovered some of his ideas when walking in the Malvern Hills, Worcestershire, England, on the grounds that they were already there, as if awaiting someone to tap into their resource; thee is no doubt that something of this kind was at work when Anthony Payne put together Elgar's Third Symphony from the composer's sketches, because his very considerable composerly abilities and scholarly knowledge and understanding of Elgar's music alone would simply not have been sufficient to enable him to bring to life the work that he has done. All of this might also sound fanciful to some, but a good deal less so, I submit, than the ramblings of Ms Brown. Considering this divination phenomenon prompted the third of my own Sieben Charakterstucke for piano, during the course of which Elgar effectively joins hands with Schönberg and Busoni in the guise of multiple and simultaneous allusions to their work.Best,Alistair
First of all my sisters cat was not responding to anything emotional -the initial change in reality occurred by the cat suddenly becoming awake and staring at something we couldn't see -there was no insect or anything obviously moving -the cat was keenly aware of the change before my sister and I. The second incident was actually quite real, in that the temperature of the room went down well below freezing. Now you could argue this was my own physiological response, fear, the chills whatever, but the radiator went from hot to stone cold -all the other radiators in the house were unaffected -I didn't mis-remember anything either -it only happened a few weeks ago -nothing like it since -I don't expect you to accept my testimony as hard evidence, and frankly I don't care if you do or do not -doubt away -My outlook has certainly been altered by these vitamins events. Also, if I can't trust my senses and my recall of events in the short term then that is more scary than the paranormal -not that I am afraid of it -. Even more disturbing to me, would be the idea that I would want to mislead or invent -to what purpose? I think it is extremely silly to dismiss any paranormal event, as always having the explanation we need, to fit the reality we are familiar with and comfortable with - This in itself is foolish. I have no desire to be a champion for it either -because as I have stated, until recently I would have agreed with you 100%. The same thing happens with those who believe in UFO'S and those that don't. I always call this the: 'Only my pond has life syndrome' If we only knew of one pond and it clearly had life, it follows that if there other ponds at least some of them must also sustain life -but some think only our planet sustains life -even though there must be many, many, thousands or even millions in the universe -
I am quite impressed that you studied with Humphrey Searle. Your arguments were also well written and presented. However, I am not sure that you are entirely accurate. This piece by Liszt, supposedly transmitted to RB -does seem to echo his late style somewhat -I certainly could not have written it, and I am fairly good at mimicking styles myself -
There was more to it than the cat waking up obviously -but I don't want to share it with you -you would pour scorn on it anyway -there was also a drastic temperature change in that incident too -by the way.I would simply define the paranormal as that which we don't yet understand. No one can say human beings understand much -I am not even interested in proving anything -you know what you know, experience what you experience and sometimes it is impossible to find rational explanations -they may exist -but who can say with any certainty? I just know that there is more to existence than I previously imagined -and sometimes the rational explanations become more silly than just accepting there is an afterlife!I can't stand arrogant psychologists -so I am not open minded enough to read Mlodinovs' stuff, nor do I care enough about his theories -so what if he discovered some interesting psychological states -It doesn't explain anything that happened to me and my sister - -but I am open minded about Rosemary Brown -the Liszt piece I posted above is much more convincing to me than the Schubert -though I love the melodies in that -they are very beautiful -whoever wrote it -
Either Schubert hasn't learnt much in the last nearly 200 years (indeed he seems to have lost some talent)
I don't subscribe to the idea that only earth could have life. but I've never seen any believable evidence of life from elsewhere coming here.
So much shite has been written on the subject that sceptics can have a field day. My bookshelves groan under the strain of books on the subject. Von Daniken makes an interesting read, but almost drowns in bullcrap. "Left at East Gate" which covers the Rendelsham Incident is somewhat harder to completely dismiss.I have no idea who this Mlodinov chap is, but perhaps "The Scole Experiment" might give some food for thought in the opposite direction.My mind remains open to all possibilities. There is fraud and opinionated arseholes on both sides of the fence.Thal
You come to a remarkably quick conclusion, based on what appears to be a 5 minute internet investigation.What do you think you are going to find on "skeptoid".Of course I might be wrong and you have balanced your research by looking at other sources over a considerable length of time.Thal
If you're not willing to read it, don't expect to learn anything about the hard evidence behind why reams of seeming phenomena are readily explained beyond all doubt. it's not even a book about skepticism. it simply happens to contain fully verifiable information that can be used by any intelligent person to explain phenomena for which the only evidence is a person's individual account (ie virtually all paranormal events, given that they are always based on people's accounts and not hard evidence). If you'd sooner decide that your own brain is infallible than learn about how our brains work, that does nothing to make your experience look credible. I learned a lot from reading this book- primarily that I should not trust what I think I've experienced as being the final word. if claims of personal experiences are all the evidence we have for the paranormal, they are no more worthy of credit than a person who stops you in the street to tell you have that he can urinate gold. one of the problems with the human nature is our desire to assume personal infallibility. it's covered in the book. It was only upon reading that I realised how much doubt any rational person needs to treat their own believed experiences with, nevermind how much doubt anyone else's assurances should be given. the brain looks to confirm what it believes to be true and nobody is immune to that. humans are notoriously unreliable, no matter how sure they are and that includes you as much as it includes me. PS I've experienced perception of drastic temperature changes myself. Perception is relative and linked to emotion. a feeling of fear alters blood circulation and can easily account for that- and among multiple people simultaneously, if you're both freaked out by a cat. it's why people go white from shock. show me a film of a mercury filled thermometer plummeting to zero and I'll be interested. tell me that you felt cold and therefore ghosts exist and I'll treat it with the same skepticism as the guy who urinates gold, sorry.
Your response is really arrogant and insulting. First of all there was no fear or freaking out about the cat, which produced the temperature change and trust me, it is extreme. I suspect even if I had video evidence and 4000 witnesses, you would still be a sceptic and call the evidence fake- You are also discounting a combination of events -That is your perogative -but as far as I am concerned the argument is finished -please don't respond anymore -it is getting us nowhere. I am still grieving, I can do without your pompous waffle. Your dismissal of the Liszt was crass by the way.
There is nothing scientific about the spirit world. I have read enough and witnessed enough to convince me. If I am a gullible fool, then I am in the company of millions and we ain't all gullible fools.
Your science is incompatable with the spirit world. If your mind is so closed to the possibilities of other planes of existence, then there is little point in continuing this conversation.