Yes, the so-called “third hand” or “third arm” has been a big factor in attempts to debunk many mediums, including Palladino, “Margery” and Rudi Schneider. I am in the process of reading a book about the latter now and it seems like dozens of researchers attested to his mediumship, including Harry Price of England, but then Price saw the mysterious movement of an arm behind Schnedier and changed his opinion. Even though they took the usual controls to prevent anyone else from entering the room, he apparently decided that a confederate was the only explanation. See my blog of January 11, 2016 in the archives at left.
Michael Tymn, Fri 26 Mar, 19:54
Michal T: If I understand you right, they deduced that it was an ectoplasmic arm because they were holding on to all the other limbs, and the possibility of someone else’s arm intervening was ruled out?
I know these questions will be soon forthcoming if I bring this up with a skeptic!
Lloyd, Fri 26 Mar, 02:49
I don’t recall the Paul Heuze “exposure.” It sounds like more of an “accident” than an exposure. It may have been discussed in Zofia Weaver’s book, but it has been a few years since I read that book and I don’t recall.
I did look at the Wikipedia entry on Heuze and noted that he supposedly exposed Jon Guzyk. All that “exposure” involved was the observation that Guzyk was capable of moving objects close to him and not at some distance. Also, Heuze and his team somehow concluded that he freed his left leg to move them, although it is unclear as to whether they actually saw his left leg move. This sounds very much like Eusapia Palladino and “Margery” “exposures.” The researchers more or less concluded the same thing, but the more observant and dedicated researchers came to realize that it was an ectoplasmic arm extending from the medium, not one of her limbs that was moving the object. The ectoplasmic arm could extend only so far and that would explain why the Guzyk observers saw distance as a factor. Since most scientists and magicians don’t believe in ectoplasm and can’t see it in the dark, they write it off as fraud. Even the great Joseph Rhine walked out on Margery because he thought she had used her arm or leg to move something, when others realized it was the ectoplasmic arm that moved it.
Michael Tymn, Tue 23 Mar, 21:25
Jon, Tue 23 Mar, 13:30
I’ve heard of The Jefferson Bible but have never read or seen it, and I have no idea how it could be entangled with Zofia Weaver’s book. If you have a camera on your phone, can you send a picture? In the meantime, if you let me know your address I’ll send you another copy. I will email you.
Do you know anything about the Paul Hauze exposure
of Franek Kluski
Paul Heuze was an amateur magician who attended seances. He said a large-sized buttocks impression was found after one of the seances. And it was confirmed to be Kluski because he was examined and had a burnt buttocks after the incident.
Some info about Paul Heuze can be found on Wikipedia. It seems he also buried himself alive to try and outdo Houdini.
Michael Coombs, Tue 23 Mar, 02:45
Thank you for your understanding.
Others might be interested in the quote I sent you from the book,“Empire of Illusion,” authored by Chris Hedges, who won a Pulitzer Prize for the book. While browsing the book, I came upon the below on page 96:
“I sat with a classmate from Harvard Divinity School who is now a theology professor. When I asked her what she was teaching, she unleashed a torrent of arcane academic jargon. I had no idea, even with three years of seminary, what she was talking about. You can see this retreat into specialized, impenetrable verbal enclaves in every academic department and discipline across the country…Specialist look down on the rest of us, who do not understand what they are talking and writing about, with thinly veiled contempt.”
I believe that summarizes the situation with me.
Michael Tymn, Tue 23 Mar, 00:28
I must report that I have received a copy of Dr. Gustave Geley’s 1927 book “Clairvoyance and Materialization: A Record of Experiments” and it is very impressive. The reprint that I received is a large format, large-font 400 page book published by Kessinger Publishing. The translation by Stanley De. Brath from the French is highly readable. There are 51 black and white photographs and 105 diagrams, much more than is commonly available on the internet. I am looking forward to reading about the detailed experiments conducted by Geley. I always like to go back to the original source of these things since with the passage of time and the retelling by various journalists sometimes things get twisted or cherry-picked to reflect the biases of the compiler rather than provide a true representation of the experimenter’s work. Original documents are even better.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 22 Mar, 20:24
I also received a copy of what was supposed to be “Other Realities” by Zofia Weaver. I thought it was to be about “The Enigma of Franek Kluski’s Mediumship” as is indicated on the cover. But on the inside is something called “The Jefferson Bible.” I think this has got to be a mistake by White Crow books in printing this. What’s up with this Mr. Beecher?- AOD
Many thanks for taking so much trouble to respond (by private email) after reading again my paper on the central pertinence of Relativity Theory.
Perhaps a helpful thought is this:
When a paper begins with an “If”, look out for the “then” that must follow. The paper will have a logical construction, a thread.
Also look out for the AXIOMATIC STATEMENT FROM WHICH THE PAPER STARTS. What precedes this statement is often necessary scene-setting, mere introduction, context, but not part of the (new??) logical argument the paper is presenting.
Look at the TITLE, and see what the FINAL INTENTION of the paper is.
Bear in mind that Newton saw the argument, after some mental effort he said was worthwhile. I would have to look up his exact words. Bear in mind that “DRAM”, a world-known Cambridge professor with a mathematical procedure actually named after him, said I had handled the matter well. (I presume to half-identify him only because the widespread misunderstanding of my paper is so exasperating to its writer. I hope that professor of mathematical logic will not be offended by my hinting at his name.) A long-standing member of the SPR says that the whole of PSI is encompassed in what I find in Relativity and its relevance to what we seek/believe.
The time will come when what I have written (or other people’s writings on the topic) will be seen as “Obvious. We all thought that from the beginning, didn’t we? So what’s new?”
I shall (when I get a period of time free, and I don’t know when THAT will be) remodel the whole paper. I shall have to start off from some familiar belief, probably one devoid of all logic, and gradually bring Relativity, the logic, and the consequences for belief in other inhabited worlds into the argument. That way, I MAY, if I am lucky, get the truths across.
Meanwhile, I have to say that there is nothing wrong with the paper, and not even anything wrong with it AS IT IS. It is simply being read with too many preconceived notions IN READERS’ OWN MINDS, which throw the reader off the track at the very first switch. There is NOTHING wrong with the paper, only with readers’ preconceptions, which block out what the paper is saying, blinding his/her view by interposing what the paper is NOT saying.
With warm regards to all who read, and benefit from, Mike’s Blogs - sincerely
Eric Franklin, Mon 22 Mar, 10:46
Michael Tymn, Sun 21 Mar, 19:34
Being awake when I would usually rather be asleep, around 5 in the Welsh morning, I have taken a quick look at Mike’s Blog of the second of December 2013, about Cora Richmond.
What Cora is quoted as having uttered about God and what she said about the soul match exactly what my own recent description in comment on the CURRENT blog say. I noticed other parallels too. This may be a clue to perceiving what I am saying about space, time, and the presence of, and structure of, multiple universes which occasionally manage to intercommunicate. I sweat (only metaphorical) blood and tears to express what are in fact very simple scientific and mathematical conceptions that explain somewhat how spiritual connections happen. I am absolutely amazed that readers cannot understand what I am trying to describe. Please persevere in reading thoughtfully, imaginatively, what I have described,
Eric Franklin, Sun 21 Mar, 06:54
Dear Mike (Tymn),
I have a number of books on the go at the moment, as well as building a cottage extension, doing all our housework, and many etceteras, so I had not noticed that I already have your book ‘No One Really Dies’, and have already read it one and a half times. I simply didn’t register the unfamiliar name Richmond. The book has a few typos in it, but not many, and I shall let Jon have a list of them asap, though that won’t be for a few weeks. I have first (single-handed) to fit a roof on the new lean-to and repair a vast hole in the roof of my workshop, which the recent gales in Wales made.
The embarrassing fact that I have already read your chapter on Cora SCOTT twice, without realising it, is a demonstration of the pressure I am under every day. But her importance had evidently got into my SUBconscious when I recognised the tally between what Amos quoted from Cora RICHMOND and my own thoughts, based on Einstein, about the consequences of Relativity a century and a half after her lectures.
It puzzles me deeply that many cannot understand the relevance of Relativity as proof of the possibility (the likelihood, indeed) of other inhabited universes right here around us - just what Cora Richmond evidently believed. I do not want to offend or sadden those whose thought is not naturally scientific, and who therefore cannot ‘see’ it, but I have, in justice to myself, to protest that it really does become OBVIOUS once a reader does see it. (A well-known Cambridge mathematical logician said I had handled a difficult subject well. I think we can take some notice of his opinion. Others have ‘seen’ it too.) I therefore offer my paper yet again to anyone who wants to try her/his imagination and intellect on the matter.
Eric Franklin, Sat 20 Mar, 22:11
Thanks for your many comments and your interest in my book, which is already on the market under the title “No One Really Dies.” It is available at Amazon.com
I’m sorry I don’t have a spare copy to send you, but even if I did the postage from U.S. to U.K would amount to more than the cost of the book.
I’m also sorry that I am not comprehending your ideas relative to the phenomena discussed here. It seems to me that you are offering a theoretical model which requires being able to grasp and visualize many links, whereas most of us are looking at the end product and wondering if it is supposed to be.
Michael Tymn, Sat 20 Mar, 18:12
Dear Mike (Tymn),
I am glad your latest book will mention Cora Scott.
I assume Jon Beecher will be publishing it.
I was some decades in print and graphic reproduction work. I have proof-read and corrected a few of Jon’s books. Modern printing processes (known as Print-on-Demand) and the resulting favourable economics allow small changes of already published books in a way earlier technology totally denied the opportunity to correct after the sheets were printed. (Inner Traditions created one huge typographic-layout error in our book, on page 151 for those of you who have it. Email me at <email@example.com> for a corrected page PDF of page 151.)
I would like to buy a copy of your new book, Mike, as soon as it comes out, and (given time in a very burdened life for an eighty year old) to proof-read it too, while, of course, learning about Cora Richmond.
Kind regards to all who enjoy Mike’s Blogs. I certainly do.
Eric Franklin, Sat 20 Mar, 11:35
Thanks for adding comments of Cora Richmond. Incidentally, she is the subject of Chapter 5 of my latest book, although I have it under her previous name of Cora Scott. She is also discussed in my blog of December 2, 2013.
Michael Tymn, Sat 20 Mar, 08:40
Amos represents Cora Richmond’s view by saying “. . . there are natural laws that govern all realities. It is for humans to discover them and by acknowledging them, bring their effects into physical reality. Among other things she sees materialization occurring in the physical world through the accumulation of unseen substances (“atoms”) into various forms that can be seen. And she foresees that eventually we will be able to see the “angels” walking among us.”
I believe this is correct, but note that it is an incomplete and rather vague description (because expressing 19th century scientific understandings in 19th century language) of the very same process of materialisation that I have myself described in comment using the more precise terminology and greater knowledge of 21st century science.
Is it not?
Note that Relativity Theory was still in the future when Mrs Richmond spoke, and it is Relativity Theory that proves the possibility of concurrent universes (eg our own and that of what we call spirit) existing alongside each other, yet in all normal circumstances totally out of touch with each other. The demonstration of this is very easy indeed for anyone with some imaginative grasp of simple three-dimensional geometry and just one easy step of mathematical logic, and, of course, that overall genuine respect for honest knowledge that Imperator demands of us.
Why no interest in or response to my comments on the matter?
Eric Franklin, Sat 20 Mar, 06:33
Here is another quote from Mrs. Richmond taken from “Materializing Possibilities” and given as a response to a subject chosen by an attending audience to her lectures. - AOD
“If spirits are to materialize themselves, and you are to witness the best results of that materialization, it is your business to adapt yourself to the laws connected with them; not to dictate the terms, not to decide how it ought to be, but simply strive to know how it is. If there be jugglery it will be exposed; if there be trickery it certainly will be unveiled. There are always a sufficient number of self-appointed detectives in the world to ferret out any crime, and if there were no one, the crime itself would find itself out. There is that weakness in deception that it sooner or later weaves a mesh for its own revealment. There is that strength in truth that in spite of numerous so-called exposures it always comes out triumphant.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Fri 19 Mar, 17:20
This is the spirit in which materialization should be sought. No marvel, no wonder-working; nothing but the silent laws of the spirit, waiting for man to know them; waiting for the recognition of the world, until forms shall appear, beings shall walk by your side, visible appearances shall be made known that will indicate the contact of the two worlds, and it shall be no more strange for a materialized form to appear in your midst that it is now for you to recognize and meet one another. You will change, the substances surrounding you will change before this takes place, but it shall be done. Now, it requires careful conditions, selected circles, the best kind of atmospheres; it will then be a perpetuous state of the world, and then men and angels will not be strangers to one another.”
I have been prompted by this discussion to re-read a couple of lectures by Mrs. Cora L. V. Richmond. As published in 1878 in a book titled “Is Materialization True?” I suppose that now that I have thought a little bit more about such matters as related to a possible spirit world and have a somewhat wider knowledge of such things that I find the erudition of Mrs. Richmond on the subject of materialization not only mind expanding but also congruent with my own inclinations to try to explain such things. She provides some insight into the processes which may be involved with materializations. I only wish I could quote those two lectures in entirety for everyone to review. They are available on the internet but the one I found takes several minutes to download . I will provide the link at the end of this comment which may or may not work. The lectures have to be read carefully, not skimmed as I am at times wont to do. I find her thoughts exciting now and predictive in part of how humans are advancing toward further enlightenment and a new reality.
As I understand Mrs. Richmond she does not subscribe to two or more worlds made up of different processes but that there are natural laws that govern all realities. It is for humans to discover them and by acknowledging them, bring their effects into physical reality. Among other things she sees materialization occurring in the physical world through the accumulation of unseen substances (“atoms”) into various forms that can be seen. And she foresees that eventually we will be able to see the “angels” walking among us.
The following quotes may provide some flavor of her thoughts and writing. - AOD
“When the conditions are perfect the perfect form is evolved; when the conditions are imperfect various stages are evolved and are considered failures; sometimes are even considered impostures. But supposing, in the process of taking a picture, you were to suddenly rush into the photographer’s dark cabinet, insist upon hauling out the plates and seeing what progress he had made, would it be imposture, on the part of the photographer, if there were no real picture there? So many persons imagine, because, during the process of materialization, certain things are discovered that do not seem to conform to their ideas of what should be the state of affair, therefore there is trickery”
“This substance upon which spirits act to produce the representation of material forms is, as we state, the most delicate of all substances which the human form holds, and is the one ultimate link connecting matter with spirit. Upon this spirit breathes its volition or will-power; an aura is created that draws just so much of the vitality from the form of the medium and frequently from others who are in sympathy what are present.”
Amos Oliver Doyle, Fri 19 Mar, 16:48
Is it not obvious that if a spirit is to be seen/observed/heard/sensed in any way, down here in this world, it has to clothe itself with what we can sense with our five embodied, filtering, restricting senses? The spirit itself, the bare consciousness, cannot be seen whether a terrestrial spirit or one from another world. Spirit cannot be seen by beings with our terrestrial limitations of sight. OUR OWN spiritual part, our self, our soul, our conscious being, cannot be seen, just as spirits from other worlds cannot be seen unless, as I say, they clothe themselves with THAT WHICH CAN BE SENSED BY BEINGS IN OUR WORLD. If this is not obvious then one’s whole understanding of life/non-life, spirit/flesh-and-blood, etc etc etc has to be dismantled and rebuilt. The great duality is between life and non-life, between God and Her/His creation, which is external, as Newton says, but within the Great Whole, as I added to what Newton said. The Creation is in a part-to-Whole duality with God. This ‘structure’ of Reality is made obvious to our minds (though many deny the obvious) in OUR, down-here-mistaken definition of death - the dead do not move, and that fact IS the very definition of what WE HUMANS (in our spiritual blindness) call death, is it not?
Perhaps this need, for all of us, to understand things differently from the way we were taught by blind leaders of the blind, eg in our youth, in our Sunday Schools, by most but not all philosophers, etc, has some relevance to whether or not we are aware in our terrestrial, adult consciousness, of spiritual action taking place in our world.
My view is that spirit (life) (God) is invisibly present throughout all the universes, INCLUDING OUR OWN LIVES (which are all part of that WHOLE) and Spirit makes itself VISIBLE now in this our own, rather low, universe, now in that universe, often intercommunicating BETWEEN universes, often via mediums who dwell in those universes. Mediums have bodies from which their souls can step aside more easily than most, visible tangible bodies that can be temporarily inhabited by spirit from elsewhere, do they not? Then, but only then, the visiting spirit can speak or write via the our-world temporarily vacated medium. Life pervades the whole, IS the WHOLE. Life is God. God is life, livingness itself. But there is an externalised creation that is, in the sense Newton means, not-God. That Creation is slowly and painfully on its way back to God (see the Apostle Paul to the Romans). We are, meanwhile, snippets of God living entrapped in the not-God created world. Spirit APPEARS to beings that are trapped in energy-matter universes (such as ours) by clothing itself in the “stuff” of those universes. That’s why materialised hearts beat in those universes. We are ourselves, down here, right now, souls inhabiting material bodies in exactly this way, and our material hearts beat (until they fail, and then the INVISIBLE soul leaves, (perhaps with a faint trail of ectoplasm as it goes - ectoplasm is the “etheric” bridge between the spirit liver and the matter s/he lives in down here) and the departing spirit realises that it has itself always been alive because the Great Being IS livingness itself, the invisible living WHOLE, but OUR individual spirit has been trapped embodied in our low universe of matter and energy. It is all so very simple and understandable - if one allows the higher beings to let us perceive it.
I have no time today to expand this further. In understanding it, allow for the gross vagueness of words. Many spirits from Elsewhere tell us words are no good, and writers down here do already know that. But readers usually choke on words they do not, at first reading, understand. Read this twice if necessary. I have read Einstein on Relativity more than TWENTY times, to “see” every truth he is pointing to.
And to you, Amos, I must say, kindly, Are you still going to ignore what may be information, understanding, perception, that will assure you of the reality of Spirit in our lives down here? Maybe the higher spirits will use even my words to show their real involvement in our lives down here.
Eric Franklin, Fri 19 Mar, 09:30
Another excerpt from the Okolowicz/Weaver book:
“Suddenly, in a corner of the room (some 2 metres from the medium) a misty human shape appears. We see it clearly in the light of the red lamp. It is flowing, and moves through the furniture easily. It stops at the desk, 5 metres away from the medium and beyond the light of the red lamp, but it is still visible like a misty pole the height of a man…After a moment the figure floats towards us, through the furniture without disturbing it. It suddenly stops close to a participant who feels the touch of a warm hand (which he cannot see) which puts a piece of paper in his hand. We at the same time observe only a flowing and immobile nebula, vaguely resembling a human shape, and a clearer and brighter piece of paper floating into the hand of the participant. The nebula suddenly disappears and a few seconds later we see it a metre away, by the wall, shadowed by the furniture, as if motionless. A moment later we have the impression that it is absorbed into the wall, and then it finally disappears.”
Many of the phantoms, according to Okolowicz, seemed to be in an intermediate stage of full materialization, having combined features. “Sometimes they seemed to divide into two, three, or more figures materialized to different degrees. Some seemed to be interested in the seance, others appeared aimless, wandering about and, for example, looking at the books as if they could see in the dark. They seemed to have their own concerns and personalities and sometimes seemed to argue among themselves, while some seemed to be looking for particular participants.”
In one sitting, a woman felt her string of pearls being rubbed, after which an exotic female materialized with a similar string of pearls. The sitter immediately checked her own pearls and found them in place.
Michael Tymn, Fri 19 Mar, 06:59
Is it not obvious that if a spirit is to be seen down here in this world it has to clothe itself with that which we, in this world, can sense with our five senses? The spirit itself, the bare consciousness, cannot be seen whether here or there. OUR OWN spiritual part, our self-soul, our conscious self, cannot be seen, just as spirits from other worlds cannot be seen unless, as I say, they clothe themselves with THAT WHICH CAN BE SENSED BY BEINGS IN OUR WORLD, at least in all the NORMAL circumstances of our world. If this is not obvious then one’s whole understanding of life/non-life, spirit/flesh-and-blood, etc etc etc has to be dismantled and rebuilt.
Perhaps this need, for all of us, to understand things differently from the way we have before has some relevance to whether or not we are aware of spiritual action taking place in our world.
My view is that spirit (life) is invisibly present throughout all the universes, and makes itself VISIBLE now in this universe, now in that one, often via mediums who dwell in those universes. Mediums have bodies that can be temporarily inhabited by spirit from elsewhere, are they not? Then , but only then, the spirit can speak or write via the medium. Life pervades the whole, IS the WHOLE. Life is God. God is life, livingness itself. We are snippets of God. Spirit APPEARS to beings trapped in energy-matter universes (such as ours) by clothing itself in the “stuff” of those universes. That’s why materialised hearts beat in those universes. We are ourselves, down here, right now, materialised souls in exactly this way, and our material hearts beat (until they don’t and then the INVISIBLE soul leaves, and realises it has itself always been in the invisible living WHOLE, but has been trapped embodied in our low universe. It is all so very simple and understandable - if one allows the higher beings to let us perceive it.
I have no time to say more (I am far too this-world busy with some very mundane tasks) nor to explain this better if it is unclear.
One other tiny point. Your ignoring of everything I have to say is becoming rather obvious as well, is it not? I cannot be the only one who has noticed it.
Imperator’s messages and explanations given in Stainton Moses’ book ‘Spirit Teachings’ have much to tell any of us who will listen.
Eric Franklin, Thu 18 Mar, 13:18
As Keith Parsons pointed out in his comment, the book “Other Realities?” by Zofia Weaver, published in 2014 by White Crow Books, offers much more about Kluski. It is actually an abridged translation of a book in Polish authored by Norbert Okolowicz in 1926.
Okolowicz reported that 84 persons confirmed recognition of 88 phantoms of deceased persons known to them and in a number of cases the phantoms kept appearing time after time without being recognized, until the right participant attended and identified the phantom.
Some of the phantoms were so perfect in their materialization that it was difficult to distinguish them from living persons. Their behavior was described as dignified and solemn. It was further reported that they would often react accurately to thoughts before the individual sitter had a chance to articulate them.
A lengthy report by Dr. Antoni Czubrynski is quoted. He reported that his father communicated via automatic writing in his (the father’s) handwriting. His father greeted him in his childhood nickname, which he was certain Kluski could not have known and which he (Czubrynski) had actually forgotten. Czubrynski further reported that he also heard from an old friend, one he had not heard from in years. He concluded that she had died, but he later found out that she was still alive in England. (Living to Living Communication is discussed in Chapter 20 of my latest book, “No One Really Dies.”)
Bottom line: The hand molds (or moulds) seem like a minor phenomenon compared with the other phenomena. If the hand molds are to be debunked, then it would seem that all the other manifestations should be equally debunked.
Michael Tymn, Thu 18 Mar, 00:48
Pawlowski is reported to have said, “To accept the possibility of creating in a few minutes live and intelligent human beings, whose bones one can feel through their flesh, and whose heart-beat one can hear and feel, is beyond our comprehension.”
Not to be argumentative but why would a spirit have a need for bones and a heart if it is consciousness that survives? Perhaps it is that only a materialized form needs to have a beating heart. Is a beating heart just part and parcel of a complete materialized form and, as I would suppose, not really necessary for a spirit consciousness? Kluski’s materialized spirits are not the only spirits in which a pulse has been detected. As I recall a pulse was detected in ‘Katie King’ a materialized spirit of Florence Cook and as investigated and documented by Sir William Crookes.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Wed 17 Mar, 20:28
Materialized spirits with a beating heart and pulse make me suspicious that a living being is impersonating a materialized spirit. I would be more impressed if the materialization DID NOT have a pulse. But I suppose, as Pawlowski is reported to have said “[It] is beyond our comprehension.” Perhaps that is one way to just ignore finding an answer to the question but I think it is a reasonable question to be concerned about pertaining to materialized spirits! - AOD
Apparently James, as well as other well-known people he personally knew and worked with, and of whom we have all heard, spoke from the Elsewhere he was in after his terrestrial death, acknowledging that he had been too sceptical while alive on Earth, and had indeed found himself still alive elsewhere.
If I am right that the great duality is between God and His/Her non-living creation of mere stuff, (a view akin to Newton’s) we are all alive, and will remain so when the mere stuff fails us.
I do not think you are a sceptical unbeliever like James. If you were, you would test ideas that are offered to you, but even this very day you ignore a comment from me shared with all, but addressed to yourself.
I regard the attitude you show as well below rational, scientific standard, and therefore self-damaging and unwise, as well as unnecessary. No, you are not a sceptical unbeliever like James. You are, sad to say (so please change), just excessively sceptical, and therefore unhappy. Do trust the goodness and kindness and lovingness of God more. I am sure there is often reason for the spirit world to fall silent, both in whole historical eras that are too sceptical, and also with individuals - but ALL things work together for good. Don Porteous’s chapters on the Marian phenomena in his first book draw attention to the fact that our era is over-sceptical to its own disadvantage.
I hope this is a worthy comment. I have to break off urgently and attend to one of my 24/7 duties.
Eric Franklin, Wed 17 Mar, 17:43
Regarding the ‘hair’ in the mold or cast of Kluski’s wax impressions; some say it was an impression and others say it was an actual hair—-apparently from a hand. I think this represents an example of the problems with reports of Kluski’s seances. They often provide conflicting information. And then there is the report that Kluski “dropped his pants” and made an impression of his butt in the wax after which he suffered burns for several days. What to believe! What to believe! - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Wed 17 Mar, 16:24
To answer Amos’s latest comment: Surely the IMPRESSION OF a hair was a real-this-world impression of a real this-world hair that had found its way into the mould when the plaster hand was being cast by a human operator down here in his physical-world laboratory?
No problem, as people say.
This seems utterly obvious to me . . . so I have to ask: Am I being an idiot?
I don’t think I am, any more than I think my view of Relativity shows some laughable mistake.
Eric Franklin, Wed 17 Mar, 14:16
Amos Oliver Doyle, Wed 17 Mar, 14:10
Entertaining and informative article on Pavvi!
I agree with William James who apparently saw himself as a “scientific disbeliever”. Michael Tymn provides James’ view regarding various supernatural phenomena, at the end of his book “No One Really Dies”.
“William James explained his attitude in this regard stating that it was better to believe too little than too much, and thus he took the point of view of the ‘rigorously scientific’ disbeliever.”
Amos Oliver Doyle, Wed 17 Mar, 13:43
Me Too! - AOD
Dear Newton, and all,
A week or so ago you described your view that (restating it too briefly) God created something that was non-God, and set in motion its return to Himself.
My own way of describing the situation is very close to yours, but has one feature that may be illuminating. I believe that (1) God is not just living, but IS LIFE ITSELF. I am sure you agree with this way of expressing it. (2) What He/She created that is separate from Himself is NON-LIFE (which scientists call radiation and matter, ie energy and mere ‘stuff’ (and there is a mass/energy equivalence). (3) We Beings are LIVING beings, tiny parts of God’s OWN Being, ie we, like God, are LIFE, but separated from His/Her central comprehensive Beingness because we have to live IN the created “external” cosmos of mass/energy, the “NOT-God”. (4) Eventually, we escape from the matter/energy quagmire, and (we hope) are invited to live in a dwelling place nearer to God, ie having more dimensions - though some remain at the same level (they reincarnate here in THIS universe) and some even descend to lower levels on account of lower consciousness and lower ethics (a big subject, too big to waffle about here). Some escape to universes of a higher number of dimensions on account of spiritual achievement down here. (I shall not presume to hint at the “criteria” applied for the granting of this privilege.)
Once the words I am using are seen as meaning what I do mean by them, this shows itself to be a very simple duality between life and non-life. We are, from our very start, lives, snippets of LIFE, and we swim to the shore of LIFE through our trials and tribulations amidst the non-life morass. I am a “strong dualist”, like yourself, Newton.
As always, more should be said, but if words were less ambiguous less could have been said to tell just as much.
Eric Franklin, Wed 17 Mar, 10:45
Some background on Pawlowski can be seen at
Michael Tymn, Tue 16 Mar, 22:52
I did not receive the latest Blog until this afternoon. A delay in the system of three whole days. Delay of internet messages is not uncommon. This time it has the advantage that many comments on Mike’s latest Blog have already appeared before I can respond at all.
I notice that, as so often, it is Mike Tymn himself who, in my view, provides the right answers to the main question(s).
“This envelope or ‘glove’ is then freed by dematerialization of the member.”
I am more than 98.8% certain that this is the correct answer. How so sure? The necessary ‘mechanism’, if that’s the word, is a necessary mathematical consequence of the THEORY OF RELATIVITY. I have been saying this, one way or another, for a year or more, but almost nobody takes any notice. (Yes, a few do, and for them I am grateful, and a good proportion of them approve of the paper I wrote.)
Fodor states the same explanation as Mike Tymn, using other words: “The impression which the process and the moulds leave in the minds is clearly as if the hands had evaporated, dematerialized and left the tell-tale casts behind.”
The fact, astonishing though it may be, is that the hand around which, like a glove, the wax forms the mould that remains after the spirit has left is not even in our universe. That is why it is so difficult and so rare that such a hand succeeds in appearing at all, or in acting in any way in OUR universe, and also why and how the hand manages to withdraw from the mould without damaging it.
If anyone wishes to read how this fact derives from Einstein’s Theory of Relativity they have only to contact me.
Amos says (and I shall quote a whole paragraph so that the interconnections in his thought can be easily seen): “As science progresses and new ideas and proof are produced through physics, perhaps new discoveries will be confirmed. Unfortunately I have not been able to achieve the 98.8% belief in the spirit world that you [Mike Tymn] and others have found. The reason perhaps is that any spiritual effects are disappointingly absent in my life and have been for many years now. After a few “intimations of immortality” more than a decade ago, everything has been very silent in my life. This overwhelming stillness has been overpowering for me. I seem to have lost touch with anything spiritual.”
A suggestion for Amos is that his finding himself GENERALLY out of touch with spiritual matters may have resulted from a mind-set that shows itself in the SPECIFIC scepticism persistently shown in the matter of the relevance of relativity theory. Amos, I have offered you the relevant understanding for over a year, with nothing but scepticism and silence as response. Yet you say “As science progresses and new ideas and proof are produced through physics, perhaps new discoveries will be confirmed.” Amos, you are willingly out of touch with the very thing you suggest will help, namely science. You are out of touch because you are allowing your mind to close, and become TOO sceptical, too dismissive of the surprising. The open mind “gropes for truth” (your own words) better than the prejudiced and overly-sceptical mind you seem to have.
Eric Franklin, Tue 16 Mar, 22:06
Sorry, I misread (and misunderstood) the hair-impression-on-the-hand thing. It was not hair, apparently it was an “impression” of hair. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Tue 16 Mar, 21:33
The obvious question that comes to my mind is why, if the spirit hand dematerialized in the wax forms was human hair found in the mold? Wouldn’t the spirit hair also dematerialize if it were truly produced by spirit? - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Tue 16 Mar, 19:39
Someone may have mentioned this but as I understood it there were fingerprints INSIDE the was gloves.
Tricia, Tue 16 Mar, 18:16
Well, I am off to the races. I have just ordered two of Geley’s books. Thanks Michael. You have taught me everything I know about Spiritism. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Tue 16 Mar, 14:26
Excellent detailed information Michael! Thanks for taking the time to research it.
I think I may have given an incorrect impression that I don’t believe Geley or Pawlowski. Actually I neither believe them nor disbelieve them. I am simply groping for truth as I hope are all commenters here. I suppose I have to place these reports of wax molds formed from spirit hands and feet in the same category as the precipitated paintings of the Bangs sisters. As I have previously commented I believe that the precipitated paintings of the Bangs sisters, the Campbell brothers and others present a real enigma for those who question the existence of a spirit reality interacting with this physical reality. I also place the writings of Patience Worth in that same category. All of these effects may have provided hard evidence, free from opinion, of something over and above what science currently knows about the human condition and/or other realities. As science progresses and new ideas and proof are produced through physics, perhaps new discoveries will be confirmed. Unfortunately I have not been able to achieve the 98.8% belief in the spirit world that you and others have found. The reason perhaps is that any spiritual effects are disappointingly absent in my life and have been for many years now. After a few “intimations of immortality” more than a decade ago, everything has been very silent in my life. This overwhelming stillness has been overpowering for me. I seem to have lost touch with anything spiritual.
Well, that is neither here nor there.
I do think that the Japanese site about Kluski’s hand molds and replication of hand molds by natural means is a very good site. I am sorry that it is so difficult to find. The last link I gave on 3/15/21 at 21:52 in a comment still works for me on several computers. That gentleman was able to form molds with extended and interlocking fingers, seemingly impossible to produce from a wax mold. He explains how removal of the wax mold from the hand is a slow process by tugging and pulling of his skin but if done before the wax has become completely solidified, that is, while it is still warm and somewhat elastic, he is able to maneuver his hand through the smaller wrist opening and then reposition the wax before it becomes brittle. He also acknowledges failure of produce a cast from some molds.
Now, just because wax molds can be achieved by natural means does not mean that I think Geley and Pawlowski are liars—-quite the contrary. I have never met them and have no way to confirm their truthfulness. Paintings can be produced by natural means too, but if one can believe those who were alive at the time of the Bangs sisters and saw them produce high quality paintings sometimes in less than 20 minutes or so then I must form my own opinion but my opinion is not necessarily truth. As a painter myself and viewing many of the paintings I don’t believe that they could have been painted by the Bangs sisters. I don’t know how they were produced but my opinion is that the Bangs sisters did not do them. The same goes for the writing of Patience Worth. I don’t believe that Pearl Curran wrote them. And I don’t know whether or not Kluski produced the molds by natural means. There is evidence that molds similar to those of Kluski’s can be produced by natural means but I am not aware of anyone creating portraits similar to those of the Bangs sisters in less than 30 minutes on the spur of the moment without any preparation or knowledge of the sitter nor am I aware of anyone producing writing in quantity, quality and style similar to that of Patience Worth.
Thanks again Michael for the detailed information. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Tue 16 Mar, 13:21
If you have Nandor Fodor’s “Encyclopedia of Psychic Sciences,” go to “Plastics” for a discussion of both imprints and moulds. I may have been wrong about D. D. Home producing paraffin molds. According to Fodor, the first paraffin casts were obtained by Professor William Denton in 1875 in Boston with medium Mary M. Hardy. In England,in 1876, Mme. d’Esperance produced the first moulds, or the “entities” produced them through her.
Fodor states: “Now the peculiarity of the seance-room moulds is that they defy normal production. Fingers are bent, hands are joined, wrists show and the mould is fine and delicate, whereas those obtained from living hands are thick and solid. Their production is markedly quick…The impression which the process and the moulds leave in the minds is clearly as if the hands had evaporated, dematerialized and left the tell-tale casts behind.”
One reader of the blog sent me an email pointing to the hair impression found by Pawlowski on one of the hand molds. I don’t know, but if the phantoms/materializations can have hair on their heads, why not body hair? Again, I just don’t see scientists like Richet, Geley, Flammarion, Pawlowski and many others being duped so easily on so many occasions under strictly controlled conditions. Once or twice, maybe, but not dozens, even hundreds, of times under lighted conditions behind locked doors.
I don’t see hand molds being any more “absurd” than the phantom playing an accordion while floating across the room in the home of Sir William Crookes (as reported by Crookes) under lighted conditions with D. D. Home. Then again, I think it was “the great” Randi who theorized that Home ran a rope down the chimney of the Crookes’s home and carried out levitations and other phenomena using that rope. Of course, it also theorized that Crookes had a romantic relationship with Florence Cook, the materialization medium he studied. It has also been suggested that some associate of Geley found a “confession” by Geley after Geley was killed in a plane crash in 1924. I have never read what the confession concerned or if it was actually verified as having been produced by Geley.
As I mentioned, there seems to be no end to the “might have” or “could have” speculation, nearly all the speculation by skeptics who never observed the medium.
Michael Tymn, Tue 16 Mar, 02:05
I could get only Kanji from the link you gave.
The best reference on the molds (or “moulds”) may be Geley’s book, “Clairvoyance and Materialization: A Record of Experiments.” He devotes some 20 pages to the subject, including a number of photos of the molds.
He writes: “The procedure is to set a bowl containing paraffin wax kept at melting-point by being floated on warm water, near the medium. The materialized ‘entity’ is asked to plunge a hand, a foot, or even part of a face into the paraffin several times. A closely fitting envelope is thus formed, which sets at once in air or by being dipped into another bowl of cold water. This envelope or ‘glove’ is then freed by dematerialization of the member. Plaster can be poured at leisure into the glove, thus giving a perfect cast of the hand.”
Geley further states that they used a single tank, 12 inches wide, holding 2 pounds of wax floating on warm water. This gave a depth of about four inches, which they found sufficient, as it led to defects in moulding, which are later noted. The tank was placed on an electric heater, which made the paraffin so hot that they had to shut off the current before beginning. They found that the wax cooled, sometimes too fast.
The tank on its heater was placed on a table in front of Kluski, two feet from him. The experimenters linked hands round the table, and two of them held Kluski’s hands. A very weak red light was maintained, sufficient to show form.
“We thus obtained in our laboratory nine moulds, of which seven are hand moulds, one of a foot, and one of a mouth and chin. This last is of normal size; the eight others are smaller than natural size, and seem to reproduce the hands and foot of a child of five to seven years old.”
Geley further states: “It would seem, according to Mr. Kluski (or the entities speaking through him), that the operating entities can modify at will the temperature of the materialized member to accelerate the setting of the wax. We give this statement for what it may be worth, merely remarking that the hands of mediums in trance often grow suddenly cold.”
He further writes: “In completing our investigations we have verified that the lines of the hands have nothing in common with those of the medium.” They submitted them to M. Bayle, for an anthropometric examination to confirm that there was no resemblance between the casts and Kluski’s hands.
“The straight position of these hands and their partial immersion might suggest the fraudulent substitution of a living hand,” Geley goes on. “But not only is such a supposition negatived by the extreme thinness of the glove but these particular casts do not stand alone.”
As for controls, he reports search of the room, of the medium, doors bolted on the inside, and someone always holding each of Kluski’s hands. There is no indication that Kluski was required to be naked, as with the experiments observed by Pawlowski.
I don’t know, Amos, maybe I’m gullible, but if we can’t believe Richet, Geley, Flammarion, Palowski, and other respected scientists, and prefer to accept the “might have” or “could have” done it this way reports of people who never observed Kluski or were even born at the time, I don’t think we can accept anything as fact, no matter how “absurd” it might seem. Incidentally, Kluski is not the only medium to produce paraffin molds. I’m pretty sure D. D. Home and Eusapia Palladino were also mediums through whom “entities’ produced such gloves. I will check on that.
Also, keep in mind that Richet refused to believe in “spirits,” at least publicly. He saw it all as some subconscious manifestation of the medium not yet understood by science. He was not a “Spiritualist.” I don’t think Geley or Pawlowski were Spiritualists, either, so I don’t think it follows that they gave Spiritualism a bad name.
Michael Tymn, Tue 16 Mar, 01:07
This link really has me perplexed now. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. But I never give up! - AOD
Try this in your browser It should take you to the listing for Kluski in asios:
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 21:52
I don’t know why but the most recent link to the Japanese site regarding wax hand molds doesn’t always work. I have had success by copying the link and pasting it into a blank Microsoft Word document. Then I do a Control/Click and it takes me directly to the site I wanted. Sometimes if I paste it into a browser I get the home page of the site and cannot find the article on Franek Kluski and the wax molds. I think the article is worth the effort it takes to find it. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 21:26
The very last link I posted doesn’t act like a link. It will have to be copied and then pasted into a search engine. I was able to do this and got the correct page—-a pretty good page I think.
The JSTOR link is interesting because the article was written by Geley. Unfortunately the link does not always take one to the article, apparently depending on the computer operating system used to access it.
There is a lot of conflicting information out there concerning the Franek Kluski’s hand molds and casts. Sometimes it is difficult to know how the term ‘mold’ is being used. In some places mold is used to indicate a thin wax covering of a hand that must have been dissolved before it was withdrawn from the wax. In other places
mold’ is used to indicate a cast made from the wax mold.
I have to say that this is the kind of old information that gives Spiritualism a bad name I think because it is not well documented and what documentation is available is conflicting. And, apparently what is presented as evidence is not easily accessible to those who want to take a look at it.- AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 20:11
I could not open the last link you provided. However, here is a little more explanation from Richet, as set forth in his book, “Thirty Years of Psychic Research,” page 543.
“Geley and I took the precaution of introducing, unknown to any other person, a small quantity of cholesterin in the bath of melted paraffin wax placed before the medium during the seance. This substance is soluble in paraffin without discolouring it, but on adding sulphuric acid it takes a deep violet-red tint; so that we could be absolutely certain that any moulds obtained should be from the paraffin provided by ourselves. We therefore had certain proof that the moulds obtained could not have beenprepared in advance but must have been produced during the seance, itself. Absolute certainty was thus secured.
“During the seance the medium’s hands were held firmly by Geley and myself on the right and on the left, so that he could not liberate either hand. A first mould was obtained of a child’s hand, then a second of both hands, right and left; a third time of a child’s foot. The creases in the skin and the veins were visible on the plaster casts made from the moulds.
“By reason of the narrowness at the wrists these moulds could not be obtained from living hands, for the whole hand would have to be withdrawn through the narrow opening at the wrist. Professional modellers secure their results by threads attached to the hand, which are pulled through the plaster. In the moulds here considered there was nothing of the sort; they were produced by a materialization followed by a dematerialization, for this latter was necessary to disengage the hand from the paraffin ‘glove’.”
Michael Tymn, Mon 15 Mar, 19:10
Here is a pretty good site demonstrating how to make a wax mold of hands. Apparently it is possible and relatively easy if you go slowly and are prepared for failures. - AOD
【海外向け】Franek Kluski’s moulds of spirit hands | 調査レポート | ASIOS
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 18:18
I love Keith’s reference to a squirrel, dog, and ape-like creature also reportedly manifesting. I’ve always believed that life is both sacred and eternal…all life. You’d probably say I’ve taken this too far were I to confess that Schweitzer’s “reverence for life” has led me to spend hour after hour deporting the ants who’ve taken a shine to my kitchen. But I’d also bet I’m no crazier than many others who read Michael’s blog.
Newton E. Finn, Mon 15 Mar, 16:38
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 14:55
JSTOR makes it difficult to retrieve that link. I don’t know how I got in. I must have had some spirit help because when I tried again I was blocked by JSTOR. - AOD
Here is an article written by Dr. Gustave Geley about the process of making the paraffin molds of hands and feet. It was published in Scientific American apparently in 1923. Geley reports a somewhat more extensive process and it appears that there is a grainy picture of an actual mold. The article available on the internet seems incomplete or more likely I don’t know how to get the rest of it.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 14:47
There are numerous YouTube videos about making hand molds. (Even Martha Stewart has one.) There seems to be some confusion about whether the video is about a “mold” or about a casting from a mold. And modern materials, not paraffin, are used in making a mold which make it easier to withdraw the hand from the mold and fill it to make a cast. - AOD
“Is Amos saying that Pawlowski is lying or deluded ?” As a matter of clarification be it known to one and all that if Amos has something to say, he will say it. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 15 Mar, 12:49
Is Amos saying that Pawlowski is lying or deluded ? If the temperature in the room drops 6 - 8 degrees during this process - presumably at spirit command - cannot moulds be solidified quickly also, at spirit command? The issue of the fragility of these molds however, is an interesting point made by Amos. Are there different densities of paraffin wax?
I agree with Michael, if you look on the internet there are all manner of skeptical descriptions of this phenomenon being replicated. Some argue that Geley made these mould himself, being intentionally fraudulent, and smuggled them into the seance room, but Pawlowski says he saw the spirit hands dipping themselves into the wax. Polidoro & Garlaschelli have duplicated the Kluski moulds by natural means. So did Houdini but made a poor job of it and took 45 minutes. Coleman reports the presence of skin-hairs in the wax of the Kluski hand-moulds being clear evidence of fraud. In particular, Wikipedia makes a feast of this skepticism and in this case (rare event!) Wilipedia is worth a read. You need to input Talk: Franek Kluski. If it were not for this widespread scepticism, I suspect the hand moulds would be suitable material for a Bigelow essay, but the controversy is too well developed to justify this. Having said all this, I was impressed by Paulowski’s testimony. You can find more about him in ‘Other Realities: The Enigma of Franek Kluski’s Mediumship” by Zofia Weaver. And I found his other testimony interesting about Pawlowski too. He saw a squirrel and a dog manifested which ‘behaved in a perfectly natural way, the squirrel jumping on the table and the dog running about wagging its tail, jumping on the laps and licking the faces of the sitters’. He also experience a hairy creature resembling an ape which had a peculiar smell, like wet dog. Weaver’s short book I rate. By the way mould in UK = mold in US
Keith P in England, Mon 15 Mar, 12:04
Amos, it’s bed time here in Hawaii now, but I’ll see if I can dig out more detail from Richet’s reports tomorrow and let you know.
Michael Tymn, Mon 15 Mar, 10:01
My sentiments exactly. You raise very good points but I assume that a spiritualist will just argue that laws of nature do not limit those in the afterlife from producing such paranormal feats.
Lee, Sun 14 Mar, 20:33
I would like to know more about these paraffin molds—-how they were actually done. It seems to me that it would take more than one simple dip into melted paraffin in order to form a wax mold sturdy enough to sustain itself. It would take multiple dips into the paraffin; each done after the previous one had hardened to build up a substantial mold, much in the way than hand-dipped candles are built-up, layer by layer. “[O]ne-half to three quarters of a minute” is not enough time to build-up a substantial wax mold. I do not understand how a thin-layered mold would be sturdy enough to maintain the integrity of itself and even multi-layered molds would quickly collapse if “carelessly thrown off’, tossed aside and rolled off the table onto the floor while still warm and unhardened. A thin paraffin mold would be extremely fragile and fragment very easily. Then there is the matter of filling the thin “mold” with plaster-of-paris without breaking it to produce the positive form of the hand. Unfortunately for us there is no evidence as the mold would have to be destroyed in order to remove the casting.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Sun 14 Mar, 15:08
At one time I made rubber molds and plaster molds and they would have to be made in more than one piece sometimes in order to extract the cast, especially if there were undercuts, without damaging it. Pawlowski pointed out the difficulties he had in trying to duplicate the paraffin glove experiment himself—-on only one finger. But we are called to believe that those living in the supernatural world can do anything however impossible in the natural world. My boggle threshold has been crossed with this one. - AOD
Weird stories like these, which I nevertheless believe to be truthful descriptions of shared experiences, help me to sympathize with William James, so bothered by the “bosh” in apparent communications across the veil. Like Michael, I’m close to 100% convinced of the existence of the afterlife, but that remaining sliver of intellectual doubt (distinct from religious faith) comes not from lack of proof but rather from this sort of proof. Proof of what, I ask myself—that there is a sublime afterlife worthy of the human spirit, or that bizarre and inexplicable things happen in THIS world? Perhaps this is what the Bigelow contest is trying to get at.
Newton E. Finn, Sun 14 Mar, 01:24
Add your comment