Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00871)

Brigitte, you wrote in part:

"I do believe that her [Blavatsky's] materializations
of letters and other objects where fraudulent. . . ." 

". . . Daniel keeps claiming Blavatsky materialised
objects, and keeps chalinging me about
parapsychological books that do not mention 
anything about that Blavatsky's materialisations would
be true." 

". . . Daniel also never quotes anything from these
books himself that would proove otherwise, wich is
sort of clever, or maybe cunning."
Quoted from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UniversalSeekers/message/2989

Brigitte,

What you write above seems to ignore what I have
written in the last week.

I specifically answered your question about modern
laboratory experiments to verify Blavatsky's
"materializations". I wrote:

"Brigitte, I am not aware of any recent experiments
that have been specifically conducted under modern
laboratory conditions to test individuals who might
claim to materialize/de-materialize objects." 

"There may be such experiments; I am just not aware of
them. But I am aware of relevant parapsychological
experiments that deal with mind-matter interaction. 
For example, some of this PK research has been
summarized by Dean Radin in THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE. 
And these PK results certainly indicate that
'consciousness' or 'mind' has the capability of acting
on physical systems. To say the least, this certainly
opens the door to the possibility that 'consciousness'
or the "mind" can manipulate 'matter' and even
'create' or 'dematerialize' material objects. Where
do you draw the line?" Quoted from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UniversalSeekers/message/2955

Brigitte, you did NOT reply to this point of mine.

I also wrote:

"Brigitte, you seem to be saying that YOU will accept
evidence about materializations ONLY from valid tests
conducted under modern laboratory conditions. It is
not clear to me why you confine yourself only to this
type of evidence."

"It appears that you accept 'some form of survival
after death'. In reaching your view on the survival
issue, did you ONLY consider and accept evidence
obtained from test results in a modern laboratory
setting? Or were you willing to consider and accept
evidence found outside a modern laboratory?"

In other words, Brigitte, in reaching your view of
"some form of survival after death", did you arrive at
that conclusion based SOLELY on modern laboratory
findings? But if you used other sources to arrive at
your view, then why cannot I use similar and other
sources to come to the conclusion that Blavatsky
materialized objects? 

Again Brigitte, I asked you about the two cases
brought up by Steve Stubbs at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UniversalSeekers/message/2956

I asked if these two cases (cup/saucer and letter
incidents) BAFFLED you like they do Steve? You did
not directly answer.

I therefore assume that your answer today which reads:

""I do believe that her [Blavatsky's] materializations
of letters and other objects where fraudulent. . . ."

means that you are NOT baffled by these two cases and
can easily explain them away as "fraudulent".

But the fact remains that both Steve Stubbs and I are
baffled by these two cases and I can speak for myself
that I consider these two cases as giving support to
the assertion that Blavatsky materialized objects.

Please share with us your "differing" thinking and
reasoning on these two cases. I'm sure both Stubbs
and I will find your reasons quite interesting.

Finally, what KIND of evidence would convince you that
Blavatsky materialized objects? Maybe I can find it
for you! :)

Or are you saying that there is not ANY historical
evidence from Blavatsky's time that would convince you
that she materialized objects? 

That you will only accept evidence from a modern
laboratory setting?

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm
"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things
at their right value; and unless a judge compares
notes and hears both sides he can hardly come to a
correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.













=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm
"...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at
their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and
hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision."
H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com