0
By Michael Prescott
I received a copy of Chris Carter's new book Science and the Afterlife Experience the other day. (It was a review copy–i.e., a freebie. Yes, there are some perks to running a blog about paranormal phenomena.) I haven't had a chance to read more than a little bit of the book so far, though I've certainly enjoyed what I've read. But I admit that I did skip ahead to glance at Chapter 18, titled “Is Survival a Fact?” In it, Carter observes that there are 3 categories of convincing evidence:
1. proof beyond all doubt
2. proof beyond all reasonable doubt
3. preponderance of the evidence
Though I didn't read further, from the book's packaging I gather that Carter concludes that number 2–proof beyond all reasonable doubt–is the most reasonable position with regard to postmortem survival.
These words reminded me of a powerful synchronicity that I experienced a few years ago. A close relative of mine had died a couple of days earlier. I was thinking about this and about the evidence for life after death. Out loud, I said to myself, “I think it's fair to say that life after death could be proved by the standards of a civil trial, but not by the standards of a criminal trial. That is, it could be established by a preponderance of the evidence, but not beyond all reasonable doubt.”
An hour or two later, I had to replace the batteries in the remote control for my television set. In order to test the new batteries, I used the remote to turn on the TV. This was in the middle of the day. I never watch TV during the day and I had no idea what would be on, or even what channel would appear. What came up was a soap opera, and the very first lines of dialogue I heard were spoken by an actor playing an attorney, who was telling his client (I paraphrase from memory): “You have to understand, Gloria, that there are different standards of evidence in a civil trial than in a criminal trial. In a civil trial you only need to establish your case with a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond any reasonable doubt.”
In combination with various other synchronicities, dreams, and unusual occurrences around the same time, I found this event very meaningful.
Nevertheless, despite such experiences, I've persisted in playing it safe in most of my discussions of postmortem survival. As long-time readers have probably noticed, I've avoided taking a definite position, and when discussing particular cases, such as examples of mediumship, I'll use words like purported, alleged, apparent, arguably, and seemingly.... continues
Source
