Last shot of the day on a film set, also the last name of the author of this blog. Martin - Latin singular, those soldiers who work for Mars, God of War. A smith. In this lifetime of words, music and film. AKA "The Afterlife Expert" (Coast to Coast AM) If you want to reach me, I can be found on FB, LinkedIn, or Gmail under MartiniProds (my youtube channel)
Empty clipboard, we asked Luana for whomever she wanted to bring
forward.
This was a Thanksgiving episode - in advance - without or idea
that it might be.
Luana knew both Billys.
She met Paxton when he and I rewrote my script
"You Can't Hurry Love" together and he supplied the title track from his
band Martini Ranch.
However, fate intervened, and our budding romance
turned into his skyrocketing career.
I made a film about three mediums
talking to Bill, it's on Gaia, ("Talking to Bill Paxton") but in this instance he stopped by to
talk a bit about the process of greeting others on the flipside.
Billy Meyer was a lifelong friend, he stopped by to talk about someone
we both knew, as well as to give his thanks for doing this kind of
research Jennifer and I are doing.
Finally Luana Anders had some comments about our cat, and then we talked a
bit about the animal realm and the flipside.
Here's Billy in our backyard with the Red Maple he bought to bury some of our pal Paul Tracey's ashes.
It popped into my head last night as I was going to sleep.
However, as noted, this morning I didn't think it was a good idea and abandoned it. But when our session began, my friend on the flipside Luana Anders said "Don't be afraid of inviting the two people that you were planning on inviting."
First I invited the father of Mary Trump, Fred Jr. He had a contentious relationship with his father, but Jennifer did not know who we were speaking to. At one point, I think I referred to him as Robert, Mary's uncle - but this was Fred Jr. in the chair, father of Mary Trump who wrote the book excoriating her uncle.
Because Jennifer had no idea who we were talking to, this is an unadulterated exploration of a father who had dementia, and a son who had a rocky lifetime - but both reconciled on the flipside. Once Jennifer realizes who they are, she gives some insight into their opinion of their son and brother. No other way to put it.
The other person I invited was Beau Biden - at first Jennifer didn't realize who Beau was (I know a few myself) but ultimately gives a poignant reading with him - what it was like to cross over and be with his mother again. He offers insight into his father, and repeats some of the themes that Joe has said in the past - waking up each day as if it's a "new day" and the quote he gave the other night about "keeping the faith" (and adding "spread the faith." Jennifer might be aware of it - but as it happens live on camera, I doubt she's aware that's exactly what Joe said in his acceptance speech.
No other way to put it. Prior to the session, I noted the time and date and the fact I was going to invite two folks to our session. I had no idea if Jennifer would be aware of it, as I hadn't spoken to her about who I was going to invite.
One was Tom Petty, in honor of his birthday, the other "The Amazing Randi" who passed a couple of days earlier.
For those aware of our connection to Tom, it's not that we knew him, or Luana Anders on the Flipside knew him - it was because, as noted in the video, he came forward soon after his passing in 2017 to visit us at our local restaurant where Jennifer and I used to meet before the Pandemic.
She remembered his name that day (and did not this day!) But as noted, he had a complaint for us about "having to wait in line to talk to Jennifer." He said "Your friend Luana has a clipboard, and it's like she's the backstage bouncer who has a list of who gets into the VIP lounge!"
As noted as well, he asked us to reach out to his family who were in the midst of a court battle. I did so, privately, reaching out to a family member who agreed to look at what I transcribed from our session. As noted, I have no idea what they made of that information, nor did I ask. I did as requested and passed his messages verbatim.
A portion of that session is in the book "Backstage Pass to the Flipside."
But Tom's 70th birthday is being celebrated this week, and I took the time to celebrate him through an interview.
Like my old friend Harry Dean Stanton, Randi was a skeptic about the afterlife.
Despite being a famous magician in his day (He beat the record held by Houdini for an underwater escape live on NBC back in the 50's) like Houdini, he went from a working magician to someone who debunked, or outed "fake psychics."
Anyone familiar with my work knows that I focus on data, that I work with mediums who work with law enforcement agencies nationwide... when they're skeptics I refer them to Bill Bratton former NYPD commissioner who was helped by Jennifer Shaffer. If she's good enough for Bill, she's good enough for me.
But that's a joke - Jennifer has proven her abilities for a long time, and I met her five short years ago. And over and over and over again, she's proven access to the flipside - not always 100% as she notes, because she is interpreting information after all - but for the most part I ask her questions based on my knowledge about the person we're chatting with and I transcribe what she says verbatim and those sessions are in the books "Backstage Pass to the Flipside" 1, 2 and 3.
But for those who have a vested interest in "debunkery" I've heard often the old saw that "you haven't tried the Amazing Randi's million dollar prize" for someone who "proves there is an afterlife or the paranormal."
The last time I replied to a fellow on Quora about that, I pointed out that knowing that we still exist is worth more than a million bucks, and further, I had no desire to play that game of "prove it to me." As I point out, in the 100 cases of people under deep hypnosis, (half without hypnosis) all of them recall previous lifetimes, all recall the between lives arena. So that makes their recollections "normal" as a base number for data - and those who "disbelieve the data" are the ones who are "para" or "ab" normal.
Jennifer and I present these sessions as they occur. I edit them for time, as she may take a minute to answer one of my impertinent questions. So for the sake of continuity, I trim those before I post the sessions.
Randi has a lot to say about his journey and to his husband Jose. Let's leave it at that. Since Jennifer had no idea who he was, it makes it that much more amusing to watch what he has to say from the flipside.
****
Then Regis Philbin stopped by - I knew Regis through our mutual pal Charles Grodin (as noted in the session) and Regis correctly recalled the day he met me on the Charles Grodin show where live on the air made fun of my "mixed outfit." (A tie and a striped shirt). Not a clothes horse like Reg, but he noted I was a misfit or mismatched.
Later, I had dinner with him and his wife Joy and Charles and his wife in Connecticut, and have had a few laughs with Regis. Always a polite guy and he had a quick comment for Charles about "slowing down" (even though last I heard he was still recording the Charles Grodin minute for KCBS in NYC.) Either way, it's one old friend talking to another.
But it was sweet to hear from him. He's a nice guy.
And then Jennifer mentioned that she saw Paul Newman "in the wings." As noted, he was someone I had invited previously, but got the impression he "wasn't interested" in chatting with me (which turns out to be the case.) He was more than happy to chat with Jennifer and we may continue the conversation in the future if he so desires.
He was funny, wise, spoke eloquently about the need to help those less fortunate than us. He had a message of love for his wife, and a comic message for John Cusack.
John Cusack and Paul Newman were in "Fat Man and Little Boy" together, I detail I did not know until I searched their names together on the net.
All I can say is that I ask questions that pop into my head.
Finally we have to thank Luana Anders for her assistance. We wouldn't have had a title if it wasn't for Tom's comment, and the idea that he sees her as a bouncer at the VIP lounge of the afterlife, is hilarious. Not something I could ever have thought up, and certainly, as you'll see not something Jennifer would have invented.
Luana Anders from one of her 300 film and TV appearances.
The Amazing Randi has a message for his pals Penn and Teller, and Paul Newman had a message for John Cusack. It's in the session, so I won't repeat it here. But it's a message of love and light from friends who are no longer on the planet, who want their friends and loved ones to know they're still keeping an eye on them. As do yours.
In my ongoing observations of conversations I've been having with folks on the Flipside (no other way to put it) the latest two topics are related to the concepts of "Meta meta metaphor" and "Learning to kneel helps one learn to stand."
As noted before, having all of these "conversations" with folks on the flipside via Jennifer Shaffer, appears to have opened a garden gate to my subconscious. (Perhaps it's the six deep hypnosis sessions that I've done with Newton Institute trained hypnotherapists (Jimmy Quast of Easton Hypnosis, and Scott De Tamble of LightBetweenLives.com - both trained by Michael Newton).
As noted in "Flipside: A Tourist's Guide on How to Navigate the Afterlife" - the second time I did a deep hypnosis session, this time with Scott instead of Jimmy Quast, I had the experience of "walking out the screen door" into a backyard again. It was like I had opened the garden gate already, and when Scott began to "count me down" I saw the gate was still open - he got a few seconds in and I said "No need to do that, Scott; I'm already back there."
Flipside squad: Jennifer Shaffer and Scott De Tamble
And in that moment, I was aware that I was spontaneously back in a classroom that I had visited two years earlier via Jimmy Quast... a classroom I've never seen before, am not consciously aware of, but is relative to the one that my friend Luana Anders told me about before she crossed over.
The one I witnessed was not like the one she had a "memory of" prior to passing ("Everyone is dressed in white speaking a language I've never heard before but completely understand") - in my view, I was standing at the back of an auditorium "in the cheap seats" of an auditorium style lecture hall one might see in a large University.
I saw my friend Luana in the back with her pals, wearing a pony tail, looking about 20 (I met her years later in her life, but recognized her instantly) and she looked at me as if to say "What the heck are you doing here?"
I spoke aloud (to Jimmy Quast, the hypnotherapist who had asked "What is this place?") and was startled that the class stopped and everyone, including the teacher looked at this interloper. As if I had "materialized" in the midst of a lecture, and now was speaking aloud (speaking aloud to the hypnotherapist Jimmy Quast and on camera) saying "Um, I'm in a classroom, and I've interrupted them, and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to be here."
Cut to two years later - doing a session with Scott De Tamble.
On the set of my film "My Bollywood Bride"
It was his suggestion that I "try another session" and I thought "Great idea!" as perhaps the first deep hypnosis session (recalling a lifetime as a Sioux) was somehow fantasy, and I'd have a completely different experience.
But that wasn't the case.
As he's counted me down, I become aware that I was teleported "back in that classroom" I had visited two years earlier, only in this time frame it was a few minutes later. I became aware that in the interim, Luana has walked me down to meet the teacher after class, and was apologizing (profusely) for my interruption of the class.
She was in the midst of telling the teacher "I'm sorry, but this is my friend and he's doing a documentary and he didn't mean to interrupt the class..." And I'm having the "Shakespearean nightmare" where an actor wakes up from a dream on stage in front of an audience and doesn't know what play he's in.
I become aware that I was standing next to my friend (I don't recall walking down from the back of the auditorium to the front of the class) but she's in midsentence when I become "consciously aware" she's making these apologies on my behalf.
Luana in double reflection.
I had the presence of mind to look up at the teacher (about 8 feet tall) and see that he wasn't upset, kind of disinterested. He said simply "So what are your questions?"
And I launched into a number of them - (transcription in "Flipside") including "What's this class about, and was I correct two years ago (in my earth time) in my assessment of how the process works?" And he answered those questions succinctly and without emotion. I was filming this session and the transcript is in the book as well. The answers are not anything I could make up, could not be cryptomnesia, as the answers were beyond any science I've heard of, or any religious concept I'm aware of. I'm just reporting.
But here we are 12 years after those events, and I'm having these series of dreams where I am "mid conversation" with a group of people.
Portrait of Luana from her fellow classmate (and young star who died in a car accident Tom Pittman).
I can't consciously say who they are, but I know that Luana is with them. And they are "discussing with me" various aspects of consciousness - how it functions, how incarnation works, and what the heck we're doing on the planet in the first place.
I have no other way to describe it.
I am no sage, I'm not a medium, I'm not someone trying to sell someone the concept. People buy my books and I warn them - "this may alter your path, so be prepared to get a refund." It's my caveat I often use - "Please return this book if it bothers you in any way. I won't be offended. Get your money back, give the book back to whomever gave it to you."
But I would be remiss if I didn't report. After all, my books are filled with people sharing their most intimate thoughts with me (anonymously if asked) and I put them in print for everyone to see. So I have no problem saying "Last night I was having a conversation with an avatar and we were talking about this..."
This is an ongoing discussion apparently. The posts about it are continuing - I have no story beats or outline of what I'm supposed to talk about. I'm just reporting here.
Four nights ago it was Luana talking about photographs being a piece of captured time, and how photographs are "meta meta metaphors" of reality.
Pere LaChaise. Are these objects our loved ones?
Or metaphors for our loved ones?
That is - the photo is taken of us, who are standing in a time frame with loved ones. Those loved ones are energy, light if you will, inhabiting form. They are playing the roles of the parts they've agreed to play - parent, friend, enemy, etc - (see previous post "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" reference from the poem that continues “rich man, poor man, beggar man, thief”) and the camera is capturing "time and space" of that moment when all were together. That time frame still exists - can be accessed like a packet of time, or like a floppy disc with all the details of the holograph of that event. By accessing the photograph we can explore further details - what guides were involved, who else was there, etc.
A photo of Prince? How does an outline translate
into an emotion? Is his energy included in
his notes, his image? If so, how do we access it?
But that too is a metaphor. Like books that we consider sacred are metaphors for behavior, like scientific facts are actually metaphors for how things really work.. One could say that all photographs are 1s and 0s (as translated in computer language) and all experiences are 1s and 0s as well. After all, all sensations are "translated" by the synapses of the brain - whether sound or light, touch or emotion - all are translations (or metaphors) for what existence is.
Further, mind bendingly, it appears (based on the research) that every event we experience is like putting a URL or a link in our mind to the experience. So we don't have to store the actual information in the lengthy (stretched out rope) of a brain... it's stored there like a link is stored on a computer. It's refers to information that is offsite. But even that offsite information is also composed of metaphor - 1s and 0s that represent experience.
This NASA photo is metaphor - as these lights
existed billions of years ago, took that long to arrive
on the planet. We are looking at light that no longer
exists, and yet it does exist. Meta meta metaphor.
Hence why, when I asked "How am I going to consciously remember this conversation?" she said "Just remember the term meta meta metaphor and it will come back to you." So that's what I've done, and that's what's above.
All paintings are metaphor; including Raphael's.
Last night it was the phrase:
"You need to learn to kneel before you can learn to stand."
Since I have bad knees from playing sports (football) I couldn't kneel if I wanted to, and if I'm in a church service, when it comes time to "use the kneelers" I'm one of those fellows who "pretends to kneel" but uses the pew to support the ruse.
Can't do it.
So the idea of "kneeling" for me is a rough concept. It also relates to "kings and queens" and "kneeling before royalty." Which to me is contrary to my persona - I once was asked by a Prince's Chief of Police if my comment "What he did is tacky" if I was "insulting the Prince." I knew this fellow was royalty, and I was in his country, observing his tacky behavior and had the temerity to tell him to his face. To which his bodyguard/chief said the sentence in a way that if I answered I could have been arrested.
But we didn't fight a war with the British to suddenly start bowing and scraping - so the idea of bowing to someone else over a bloodline is a primary no no for me. Won't do it. If you catch me doing it, kick me - as I wouldn't do it otherwise. Blood lines are ridiculous in terms of how we navigate the planet - sorry, just not going to go there.
So the sentence has my hackles up as I hear it. I know I protested the "sentence" for me to remember. But I have to allow it considering the person who said it.
Let's unpack it for a second. "Kneeling" is often associated with prayer. What is prayer? It's both meditation and supplication. On one hand, we meditate (Latin to measure - "med") on the person we are asking intercession from, or we meditate on the person we are trying to gain help for ("Tonglen" Tibetan meditation that according to peer review studies, can "cure or alleviate symptoms of depression") - so by meditating, or praying on someone else's behalf, we are technically in the kneeling position (at least mentally) of asking for assistance or help.
"You need to learn how to kneel."
Perhaps a way of saying "By dropping our ego, dropping our desires or wants on behalf of someone else, we get closer to the core of things, how consciousness functions, how we are all connected at all times, and by "kneeling" and dropping the ego, we get closer to source by doing so.
"Before we can stand" - to me, seems to be about "standing our ground" or "standing on firm logic."
So in essence, if we want to argue something, or argue with someone - we at first need to "kneel" to the idea of understanding how we are all connected, and how this person I'm arguing with is also from source, but may have an alternate experience than mine - and by "kneeling" we are able to then "be able to stand." Standing in terms of understanding how consciousness functions. "Under Standing."
Frankly - that's about as best as I can do with the concept.
I know that it sounds like a religious concept - but like I say, when I heard it, I rejected it, and said "Isn't there another metaphor I can use?" and the answer was
"You need to learn to kneel before you can learn to stand."
I looked over at Luana (in my mind's eye in this dream) and said "Who are we talking to about this?" And she said"Jesus."And then I looked back and saw that fellow, that guy - but consciously so. Robes and all. Smile too.
Startled - and at the same time thinking "Really? I've been having this conversation with him all this time and only at the very end do I become aware of it?"
Like I say - return the book (or post) if its problematic, move onto the next post if this is confusing or sounds egocentric. It's not. I'm just reporting. I have argued that in all of our chats with him (via other people, reported in "Hacking the Afterlife" and "Architecture of the Afterlife") that I have nothing to do with access to him - that everyone appears to have their own access to him (and any avatar) whenever they so choose to learn to do so. (Or open the garden gate to do so.)
Ladakh. "Future Buddha."
And by "any avatar" that's demonstrated repeatedly in "Architecture of the Afterlife" where I film people accessing Buddha, Ma Durga, Krishna, Shiva and other avatars, including "Archangels." (Self identified - not my word I would use, but they offer it.)
They all claim to be "radiating at the same frequency." And by "claim" I mean, I ask the question - "So how is it this person is seeing you at this moment in time? Is this related to their path and journey, are they creating a visual of you because they want to? Or do all of the avatars have something in common? And your appearance in this conversation is related to other conversations?" It's mind bending when "they" refer to conversations I've had with "others" that the person reporting has no access to.
I had not hear of Ma Durga - but met her first via Jennifer Shaffer. Then after a number of "conversations" looked her up. It's a metaphor for who she is. Avatar.
The answer I've filmed/recorded/reported is: "We are always accessible to you, and we all radiate at the relative same frequency."
So in this ongoing "chitchat" with folks on the flipside, I assume other folks across the planet are having the same experience, the same kinds of conversations, consciously or not.
Perhaps with their higher consciousness involved, perhaps unaware of them, but for some reason, "the veil is thinning" and I'm hearing it more and more often in the comments on Quora.
The "Hacking the Afterlife" forum has over 30k members, and 14 million views. It very well could be that their "higher selves" "guides" or "teachers" are sending them there to share this information... but either way, I'm just reporting.
Reads forwards and backwards. This post is another one about "access and process." The night after I wrote the post about "access and process" coming from a conversation I was having with my friend on the flipside, she was explaining something deeply profound to me.
Luana Anders, our tour guide on the flipside.
My conscious mind (the guy in the bed mind) was trying hard to hold onto the concepts - which were outside my normal brain's capacity to comprehend, so I asked her for a concept or phrase I could remember;
She said "Madam I'm Adam."
She was talking about the reflection we have between us and them. How we are them, and they are us. They are us "backwards" (because they retain all the past life memories) and we are us "forwards" (experiencing all of our new adventures here on earth.)
Of course, the two thirds left behind are also experiencing life - from that perspective. Attending classes, roaming around universes, visiting realms, playing mind bending games of profound mathematical construction ("CGI times a million") that mirror, remind us of everything we did here on the planet (play golf, football, tennis, car racing, horse racing, etc) but also others can attend the construct we've built.
Or so people report. ("Flipside," "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" "Hacking the Afterlife" "Backstage Pass to the Flipside" and "Architecture of the Afterlife." All these books contain someone talking about "what they're doing on the flipside" while we are on the planet.)
Experience doesn't stop. We don't stop. It's an ongoing process. While we sleep, the filters are altered (in some) so that we can have conversations, visit places, talk to loved ones, etc. We don't all recall those conversations, visits, adventures - partially because it's mind blowing, but partially because it's useless to the human body's survival.
So what's up with the palindrome idea?
Luana Anders, my pal on the flipside, was trying to help me understand "how consciousness works." That is - we have a portion of our conscious energy with us at all times (most people report "about 30%" but that can fluctuate depending upon health issues, I've heard 10% in people who have dementia, Alzheimer's or in a coma - they are aware, just not the way they used to be aware, and retain connection so that life continues on.) However, their awareness has shifted, they are "mostly back home" instead of here.
One example; Jennifer Shaffer and I interviewed an old friend who was in hospice care with dementia. He was still on the planet, I knew his son well, so I took the opportunity to ask if we could "converse with his higher self." He told us (in "Backstage Pass to the Flipside 3") that "90% of his consciousness" was "already back home." I asked if he could do the mental work to bike ride - something he did every day in old age, that was his passion - he would often ride a 100 miles a day.
He said "Everything else but." He said "He was still connected to his body on the planet so that "everyone who needed to come and say goodbye would come and say goodbye" and that required "about 10%" of his conscious energy.
The idea that we can do the same is available to us. We tend to think of people who've "died" as disappeared or gone - that's not the case.. They aren't gone, they just "aren't here." And with concerted effort, we can communicate with them. But what about communicating with our "higher selves?"
What value would come from that?
A number of things - by communicating with one's higher self, we can learn about previous lifetimes, why we chose them. We can observe, examine the arc of our lifetimes, the themes involved - and what the theme of the current lifetime is.
By examining these previous story lines, we get a handle on our current story line - plus the added benefit of losing fear, or worry about it (or our loved ones.) If everyone and anyone can access their previous lifetimes, they also become aware of the temporary nature of this one.
It's a bit like getting off stage. We leave behind props, costumes - even attitudes or illnesses - all of that is left on stage in a heap, a pile, a bundle... for the stage hands to put back.
We might come back to the stage early - as I've heard from a number of people. (I was startled to hear that James Dean had already decided to return, that he had come back as an actor, that he had come back as an actor I know, have met, that he has come back and had a successful family and lifetime, and done all the things he wanted to do in his previous trip here. That was mind bending because he came back just a few years after he left.)
I know how odd this sounds.
But when I first heard it during a session with Jennifer Shaffer ("Backstage Pass to the Flipside 3") I asked her to ask him "who he is" and he said who that was. It was not someone Jennifer knew personally, but I knew a close friend and texted that pal during the session asking "Hey, has your pal every had anyone tell him he was the reincarnation of someone?" And my pal texted back "James Dean."
Walter and Charles Grodin pointing where the craft service went.
He later told me numerous occasions where people would randomly tell his pal that - and that it didn't phase him - but that he had many more memories, dreams, etc that he was aware of - just not something he wanted to pursue.
So out of deference to that choice - I have not pursued it further... (I did say I thought it would be a cool documentary, following him around taking him to places James went to.) But when you're a successful person who needs to hear someone tell you that you were "so and so" in a previous lifetime? Who cares?
But I'm just reporting. And the odd thing was that later on (In "Architecture of the Afterlife") I was interviewing a woman across the country who was accessing her guide and the guide said "Tell Rich that thing about James Dean is accurate." This woman didn't know what he was referring to, but I did.
So I can repeat it here without the onus of "proving it."
I like to say that when people say to me "prove it" I point to the chapter with Harry Dean Stanton in "Backstage Pass to the Flipside Part One." Harry was an avowed skeptic, atheist.. When he got to the flipside, he showed up during a session and gave me private messages to give to 3 close friends at his memorial.
I did and they were flabbergasted - not only because it was coming from me, but because only Harry could possibly have known.
I asked Harry what he wanted me to say at his memorial; he said "tell people to believe in the afterlife." I laughed. "Harry, none of your atheist friends are going to believe I spoke to you." He said "Then tell them to believe in the possibility of an afterlife, so then they won't waste another minute of their life arguing about it like I did." Sage advice.
Harry Dean Stanton and Bill Paxton in "Big Love" HBO foto.
But not trying to prove anything here. Not trying to disturb anyone's beliefs. I realized that it's been a few days since I heard this message "palindrome" and wanted to discuss before I lose it altogether.
My wife had a dream about the physicist Mino who told her "We are both particle and wave. On the planet we are more particle, but when not on the planet our experience is more wave."
That's a quantum answer. Light is both particle and wave - in the double split experiment, we learn that it functions and acts as both. The wrench in the experiment is when people discovered that the result (particle or wave) depended upon the person viewing it. So they designed experiments where the results would be recorded, then a person would view it, and see "particle" or "wave" and then they'd go back to the original results and learn that the results had changed.
As if someone had manipulated the results.
Who's responsible for messing up the quantum experiments?
Consciousness is.
It permeates the universe. It's in everything, around everything - part of everything. Like the Sioux Wakan Tanka - the great spirit that animates reality.
As Max Planck said:
“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. . . . We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”
What I've learned filming people talking about the afterlife for over a decade: consciousness is a medium like water or paint. It's also the engine. It's what binds atoms. It doesn't arise. The brain is a receiver, the way receivers parse/filter sound waves.
We've got it backwards. We send about a third of our conscious energy to a lifetime, two thirds stays home (the term everyone uses for afterlife- "home"). Our "awareness" is helped by stripping or bypassing filters.
People do so via LSD, NDE, OBE, meditation, dreams, hypnotherapy. I've filmed 100 doing so, compared results to 2750 by clinical psychologist Dr. Wambach , thousands by Michael Newton and the Newton Institute.
Not gone. Just not here.
All say the same things which are contrary to religious and scientific theory. That consciousness is what binds the universe, we are all connected the way all water is connected, returns home.
They also use the term "unconditional love" when referring to it. Once we define what unconditional love is we will have the key to understanding consciousness.
Now that I got that out of the way, here's the latest interview on the flipside where I ask Luana questions about the above, where our friend Bill Paxton comes in to mention something only he could observe on the flipside, and we speak to a friend's dog who was "lost at sea" - to report that he's not lost, he's just "home." Click this link.
My two cents.
"Able was I, Ere I saw Elba."
ADDENDUM:
Based on a question on Quora about "Proof of the Afterlife."
"Here’s the thing - if anyone can replicate research, they should do so. It’s the name of the game in clinical research. That’s why I film everything. If I’m filming a person under deep hypnosis talking about the afterlife, I’m not asking the questions, I’m in the corner of the room.
If I film an interview with an old or new friend, or record it live on the air, I post that footage. Or I edit and transcribe the footage verbatim. This way, it’s not me claiming that there is an orderly afterlife - it’s just what’s in the data. The book “Architecture of the Afterlife” has 50 cases of people not under hypnosis saying the same things about the afterlife that the other 50 I filmed with the help of hypnotherapists say.
What they claim is consistent and reproducible. Two hallmarks of data. That is - if one wants to bring a drug to market, they sponsor clinical trials and they take eyewitness reports. People who had an experience using the drug (“dry mouth” “Nausea” etc) and that becomes data. Experience, and then survey. It’s how all medicine comes to market. It’s what is called “science” in terms of medicine (and for those aware of the process, they may also be aware that the placebo effect is upending the process.)
So when it comes to “proof” - one merely needs to set up a camera and get different hypnotherapists to ask the same questions to different subjects. Further, to demonstrate that there is no need for hypnosis to elicit the same reports. And those reports are consistent and contrary to religious beliefs (about good and evil, demons and the like). I’m not saying that those who claim to experience demons are not doing so - I’m pointing out that they don’t take the time to “ask the demon” who they are, what they are doing here, if they were asked to be here, or who is responsible for their appearance.
I can state that in the 100 cases I’ve filmed, the 2750 clinical cases from Dr. Wambach or the 7000 from Michael Newton and the Newton institute, there were no reports of demons, evil - they report consistently those are “human constructs” or man made metaphors for how to navigate the planet. That’s not my opinion, belief or theory - that’s just in the data.
Further - regarding the question of “proof.”
Since these reports are relative to the person experiencing them (“I see my brother!” “I see Jesus!’ “I’m hearing my mother’s voice and she’s telling me new information.” etc) - no one can prove that they are seeing or not seeing the person they know and have loved for a lifetime, perhaps many lifetimes. They have that experience (on camera) and they uniquely experience it.
But that is just like “love.”
The word love is identical to “proof of the afterlife.”
There is no scientific proof that love exists. None. There is no scientific definition for love. The concept or the term. It’s not a physiological thing (only) nor it is something that “arises” based on criteria. The word, the concept, the idea - is not provable.
But it is something that can be experienced. And those who have experienced it know what it is. Those who have never experienced have no clue what it is. Those who have experienced the afterlife (talking to loved ones, talking to people who are no longer on the planet, talking to people who have never been on the planet) have the knowledge of the experience.
There’s no proving an experience. It’s past tense. All I can say is that in the 50 cases I’ve filmed with various hypnotherapists trained by the Newton Institute, everyone had a memory of a past life, understood why they chose that past life and why that occurred. They recalled previous lifetimes and understood that they had mastered them. They also were able to communicate, see, have new information with loved ones no longer on the planet, and in some cases, new information from people who’ve never been on the planet. (“Architecture of the Afterlife”)
So the answer to the question “Where’s the proof?” is to point out that there is no proof of the existence of love, yet somehow we all know what that means. And what I’ve heard consistently in these reports, from various people who had a near death experience, or have traveled to the flipside - is that they experience “unconditional love.”
I’m fond of pointing out that doesn’t exist either - except between some people and their pets, some family members - but for the most part is non existent on the planet. Yet my saying the term - everyone knows what I’m referring to. As if they’ve already known it. My two cents.
Each week, Jennifer Shaffer and I have chats with folks on the flipside. That is, people no longer on the planet. Are we speaking to a floating ghost? Or an echo of a consciousness? Or a pool of consciousness? Perhaps it's worth looking at the "process" involved.
Jennifer is a medium who works with law enforcement agencies nationwide on missing person cases. She's used to jaded skeptics asking her questions and having their minds blown by her giving details that turn out later on to be evidence.
By her "solving" a mystery by seeing the events that took place. She's not always able to do so - sometimes people can't project what happened to them, or she misinterprets the visuals, sounds or senses she is getting. But when she's correct - she's correct. (Ask Bill Bratton, former NYPD commissioner about her.)
Jennifer and George Noory of Coast to Coast
What's the process?
I had a dream last night where I was speaking to Luana Anders and she said something that made me laugh, but it was a lightning quick thought. I mean, she passed along something funny to me, I laughed, said "I get it" before she fully formed it - like I was on the same engram or thought path with her.
And then a second later, after I said "That's funny!" I could not access it. That is me - Richard - the guy on the planet in bed having a dream where I'm talking to Luana, and I realize we're in mid conversation.
But my higher self - the two thirds left behind - got her joke. And that guy laughed before she could finish saying it. But because the mind of "me" (Richard in bed guy) is not lightning swift, I couldn't hold onto it - because it was in her mind.
So I tried to ask her - consciously - "What was it you were referencing?" She replied "Access and process." Meaning - "It's about the process - and how we access our higher selves."
So this post is about process and access. How we access people who are no longer on the planet. We are connected to them at all times (not aware of it), and since no one disappears or goes to nothingness, we all "return home" - a portion of them is always accessible. Not a "floating, meandering" portion - but one that is connected to their "higher consciousness" which is aware of all of their lifetimes (as well as ours. Just ask.)
We have filters that block our access to that information, but those filters can be altered or adjusted during a near death event, out of body experience, taking hallucinogens, using meditation or under deep hypnosis. The filters - the things that prevent us from accessing this information on a daily basis - are firmly in place. (For "filter references" in research, I recommend Dr. Greyson's "Is consciousness produced by the brain?" or Dr. Wambach's "Reliving Past Lives" where she suggests the "hypervigilant" left brain blocks the information received (the brain functioning like a stereo receiver.)
As they are altered when we are asleep.
In dreams. However - we can be open to their being altered while awake. And to do that, just "open one's mind up to the possibility that there is an afterlife" and things will spring forth. In the previous post, I mentioned how a close friend suddenly realized her pal who died ten years ago was "hanging out with her." She had written me suddenly, saying that "It feels like this guardian or guide is with me now and is showing herself to me. I can feel and hear her."
I wrote: "Ask her who she is." A few minutes later, she said "Oh my God! It's Sharon!" I knew Sharon - my pal's close friend in high school - but Sharon is keeping an eye on her since she checked off the planet ten years ago. For ten years she had "no idea" who that person might be, never mentioned it to anyone (except to me once in an email, that someone "makes her feel completely at peace when she shows up.") Told no one. Claimed who she was to no one.
And then when asked the question "Who are you?" she replied. Gave her a visual of who she is. That kind of verification will mean nothing to someone who hasn't experienced it. The super skeptics will remain super skeptics - until they have the same experience. That's how the mind works. Super skeptical until it's no longer useful.
I got a note from someone on Quora who self identified as a skeptic, but wanted to try to self experiment. He wanted to see if he could access someone no longer on the planet; his mother who had died some years ago.
He followed the method I recommended; imagined her sitting across from him. He said “I tried the method, spent ten minutes just pretending to see my mother, did a simple meditation of creating her, what she was wearing, holding her hands. He said, then he asked her a simple question he wouldn't know the answer to: “Who greeted you when you crossed over?”
She replied (aloud, in his head) “Hugh Nessel.”
He had no clue who that was, so he reached out to his sister, the keeper of family histories, and she said “That was mother's maternal grandfather. You never met him because he died before you were born."
He wrote to tell me that this incident had "shaken him to his core." He had tried a simple self experiment... and the results surprised him.
Super skeptics will tell us that everything is cryptomnesia, something we heard before, or created with our minds, which are locked in place by the brain, and die with us upon departure. That he must have heard this name somewhere someplace in his lifetime and that he just forgot it.
But you see - that doesn't acknowledge the experiential portion. Which is "hearing his mother's voice saying new information that he had not heard before." He had never heard her say "Hugh Nessel." (Or had any access to it). And when he did hear her say it, he was startled to "hear her voice" but didn't say "Oh, right, that old duffer." He was confused because he didn't know who that could be. She said a name completely foreign to him, but in her own voice, which he knew was hers.
But his sister set him straight.
Someone he never met, who died before he was born, whose name would not be common knowledge. (This is just one of dozens of examples I can recount.)
Harry Dean and his pal Bill
Harry Dean Stanton showed up in a conversation with Jennifer Shaffer a week before his memorial service. He gave me three messages to give his close friends at the service. Details about issues relating to their health that they had not told anyone, was not common knowledge. I went up to each of them and told them at the memorial service. They were flabbergasted.
I asked Harry what he wanted me to say at his Memorial - he said "Tell people to believe in the afterlife." I laughed. "Harry, you were a famous atheist. None of your friends is going to believe I spoke to you." He said "Then tell them to believe in the possibility of an afterlife so then they won't waste another minute of their life arguing about it like I did." Sage words.
Finally, someone on Quora asked me the same question today - "How do we know we are connected to our higher selves, so I can, for example, figure out the right trade to make? How do you differentiate between your own inner voice and the voice of your guide(s) or loved ones who are trying to communicate. How do I know whom to thank for the all the stock tips and subsequently, whom do I fault for not taking them ;) ?"
I replied:
"You mean Lottery numbers? Well, I always ask. They always laugh. I recommend adding intent. Who am I here to help or heal? Who am I here (in this lifetime) to make their lives happy or comfortable? Focus on the intent of the trade. Not on the self profit. But on who it will benefit. And I’m not referring to trades that are related to “good causes” (though of course that’s related) I’m referring to choices that relate to “why we are on the planet.”
I included a link from my film "Limit Up" which although cowritten with Luana Anders, was about how God (played by Ray Charles) was trying to manipulate the soybean market at the Chicago Board of Trade to end world hunger. (His assistant angel played by Danitra Vance.) I sent him a link to the film which is below.
But I included this in the reply:
The best detail I’ve heard came from a conversation with Michael Newton via Jennifer Shaffer during one or our chats with him on the flipside. (Showed up, offered insight, not by request, but just because he can). I asked him for a simple 1, 2, 3 for communication. He said “Say their name, ask your questions.” I asked “do you say the name aloud or in your head?” He said “Doesn’t matter.” I asked “So how can you tell when your actually making a connection rather than wishful thinking?” He said “When they answer the question before you can ask it.” I said “Is there a 3rd thing?” He said, “No, only two.”...
(Just like the Luana conversation from last night referenced above. She was telling me something and I got it before she said it aloud. But my "lesser" conscious self didn't "hear it" - but my "higher self" got the image and joke intended before she even finished the sentence. Hence this post about "access" and "process.")
Say their name. Ask your questions. If one is trying to access their higher self, I recommend just asking their guide. (If they don’t know who that is, learn who that is). The guide has access to one’s life plan - and can answer pretty much any question one might have. But don’t be surprised if when one is about to “Make a trade” and they ask their guide for advice and they say “And what do you plan to do with the money that you get from that successful trade?” If it isn’t part of one’s life plan, or path - perhaps avoid it."
His reply:
"The reason for my question, if I may. So, I’m standing in my kitchen, making myself a munchie snack. You know, high on life. As I have a moment of creative genius. I top my warm raspberry crumb coffee cake that is sitting on top of vanilla ice cream bar separated by a thin layer of Belgian chocolate with a double espresso. and Viola. I’m a legend in my own mind.
Before ever taking a bite I said to myself, “Oh, man. Grandpa would LOVE this!”…and before I finished the sentence I heard his voice in my head, loud and clear say the word “Vkustnyatsina”, or scrumptious in Russian. I freaked for a second. I know I heard his voice. I read all your stuff. I knew it was possible but…I know it was unmistakably his voice. But is it him, or is there an intermediary that is showing me that image and sound, as a means of establishing communications, as my guide? How would I know the difference. Is this my higher self sending me an image of him because I miss him?"
My reply:
"Wow. That gave me a chill... THAT’S EXACTLY IT. We have a hard time training ourselves not to judge events that occur. And that, my friend, was one of them. Vkustnyatsina! I love it. Scrumptious!!! Only you would know his voice. He’s been trying to talk to you for a long time. Finally! You listened! Very cool. Spasibo.
To which he replied:
"Thank you for the validation. I’m beyond words right now."
Beyond words.
It's a good place to be.
And now - in its 30th year, I bring you the epic film of "Limit Up" starring Ray Charles as God, Danitra Vance as his assistant, Nancy Allen as the soybean trader, Brad Hall as her BFF, Dean Stockwell as her boss. Luana Anders is in a scene asking me about soybeans. Enjoy something that is Beyond Words.
Proof of concept. For flipside fans, this won't be too hard to digest. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, this may be the hardest to consider. Some months ago - perhaps a year - Jennifer and I were conducting a "class" - well, Luana Anders conducts the class, Jennifer and I just show up to interview folks in the class. And during this interaction she said "Carl Jung is here." (HackingTheAfterlife Podcast) I may have said "do you mean Carl Sagan?" because we had chatted with him before. But she said "No, Carl Jung."
Carl Jung. Biography.com
We were interviewing someone else at the time, so I put him in the back of my mind as someone to interview in the future. After all, if he took the time to show up in our class, and identify himself (I couldn't pick him out of a lineup, so for her to do so, is uncanny) I should at least ask him why.
Jennifer is a medium who works with law enforcement agencies nationwide on missing person cases. She's helped Bill Bratton with a case (ask him about it) and has helped others nationwide. I've been working with her for over five years and know how accurate she is and can be. Prior to our sessions, I often "say the name aloud" of the person I'd like to speak with. So I did that in this clip - said his name aloud - used the "Greenwich Mean Time" clock (on the right side of this page) to indicate when the name was evoked - and then began to tape the session. I'm in an apartment building upstairs - sometimes too many folks are on the wifi at the same time, so apologies for the intermittent cutting out of my voice - but her voice is not interrupted. Prior to the session I did some casual research into the fellow. I have a friend familiar with his work (David Kirkpatrick, thanks) who supplied me with a couple of questions, because oddly enough that morning he was referencing him - and I said "If you had a couple of questions, what would they be?" He supplied the "Why didn't you go to Rome?" and "Why didn't you meditate or do a hypnosis session?" questions. Here's the Wikipedia page where I gathered some of the details - the "soul stone" for example. When I read that I can only think of the many filmed interviews I've done with people under hypnosis ("Flipside" to "Hacking the Afterlife" - "Architecture of the Afterlife" includes about 50 of people not under hypnosis.) In those cases, when a child does something as odd as Carl did - making a totem of a native culture - I assume it's related to a past life memory.
Carl Jung; Wikipedia
In terms of his mother, Emilie, indeed, he reported that she "spoke to spirits." He's also the person who created the concept of "Collective unconscious" as well as the term "Archetypes." Which brings us to point two. Bill Paxton and I were friends many years ago, we stayed in touch over the decades, but his career skyrocketed while mine floundered. When he passed away, I did a series of interviews with him ("Talking to Bill Paxton" on Gaia) via three different mediums. So when I was referencing that "we have friends in this class who lived in Ojai" - while interviewing Krishnamurti, I was referring specifically to him.
One of Ojai's famous residents
I didn't ask for him in this interview - but was referring to him when I said that.
Jiddu Krishnamurti
So I wasn't surprised when she said his name - but I was surprised when he said "Ask him about archetypes." I did not know that he had created the term until I read it that morning - and here was my old pal referencing something that I had not written down (I had written down "synchronicity" and "collective unconscious") - but here was someone asking a question from the flipside to someone we are interviewing. Jennifer is not an expert on Carl Jung - as she freely admits on camera. She had no idea that Carl had invented the term. But Bill did. And he is the one who asked the question. Here's the video:
This morning, former studio exec turned author David Kirkpatrick wrote to me to thank me for sharing the video with him. I wrote back: "Thanks for the questions. I tried to focus on the things that relate to this research (his "soul stone" sounded like a past life memory) his mother seeing spirits - Bill saying "ask about archetypes" is "new information." Jennifer never studied Jung (formerly a financial analyst in Manhattan beach) I had just read in the wiki entry that Carl invented the term. Bill literally raised a point only he could raise. Asked Carl his own question. (Not mine. Not from Jennifer.) It's mind bending and proof of concept. I mean... am I missing something? Is this not proof of the afterlife? Jennifer doesn't know anything about Carl.. and yet recognizes him. Doesn't know about archetypes yet repeats a question from an actor she met "in class." Proof life goes on. Full stop. Those whose path doesn't include this knowledge will not see it. Will assume we "cheated" or she "read my mind." But she asked things not in my mind. She repeated answers I could not invent. Welcome to my world." Indeed. Proof that life goes on. Proof of concept. Proof of the flipside. Proof of heaven (although everyone calls it "home" instead). Proof of being able to "Hack the afterlife." I could go on... I frequently do. But in this era when our friends are falling around us like flies, it's important to report that life goes on. They know it. We just aren't privy to that same information. Our loss.
Post script: Some wag wrote on the MartiniZone page: "Why did you have to give her so many clues as to the identity of the man? Totally unconvincing." To which I replied: "Well, since this is the first time you've seen us work together, or have watched any of our videos, you wouldn't know that I've done this for five years with her. Sometimes she gets it immediately (as reported in "Backstage Pass to the Flipside" books) sometimes it takes three or four guesses. It's not a contest. I'm not trying to prove that she can do this kind of work - I've been doing that for over five years now. I had her for 45 minutes. The clues I gave her were "he's shown up in our class before" she picked Einstein. Instead of saying "No" I said "of that era." She's not scanning my mind - or scanning her knowledge of Carl - she's asking the class "Why are you showing me Albert?" And then she said "Carl Jung." (I just now remember that it WAS Albert we were interviewing when he showed up in the classroom - asking him about turning salt to fresh water for pennies, or how to create energy from non carbon sources. The image of who we were interviewing popped into her mind - and from there came the answer.) I'm sorry if this is the first time you've watched us do this. I'd say "watch the other 20 clips here" or "read the three books where I provide transcripts" or "watch "Talking to Bill Paxton" on Gaia. Or watch the clip on here called "Talking to Paul Allen, Junior Seau and Dave Duerson."
In this clip - live - I asked for three people to assist us - and she named them in a row, one after the other. (John Lennon because I'm a friend of his son, Steve Jobs because we'd interviewed him previously, and Anthony Bourdain because I assumed they met. She names them live on camera - one after the other in a row.) Again - I'm not trying to prove anything to someone who did not sign up for a lifetime to know how the play ends. It's pointless. As Harry Dean Stanton told us "Tell people to believe in the possibility of an afterlife then they won't waste any more of their time arguing about it like I did." Once there is the possibility - then one can focus on what the content is. And that is a conversation about his mother, about his soul stone, and my old friend Bill Paxton reminding me to ask him about archetypes. Not my idea - not Jennifer's idea. Bill's idea. So thanks for the comment so that I could report that this is just one of many many many interviews we've done. People can read them, view them, discuss them at their own leisure - eventually we all get to a point where we realize how much time we wasted arguing about something that was possible."
