home books e-books audio books recent titles with blogs
Scientific Research Suggests Contact with the “Dead”

Posted on 28 December 2010, 14:34

Co-founder and Director of Research at The Windbridge Institute for Applied Research in Human Potential in Tucson, Arizona, Julie Beischel, Ph.D, is one of the leading consciousness researchers in the world today.  Her focus has been on communication purportedly coming from discarnates through mediums.

Dr. Beischel received her doctorate in pharmacology and toxicology with a minor in microbiology and immunology from the University of Arizona.  She is currently a member of the Parapsychological Association and the Society for Scientific Exploration and a member of the scientific advisory boards of the Rhine Research Center and Forever Family Foundation.  Her academic training in several interdisciplinary scientific fields allows her to design and apply traditional research methods to investigating more unconventional topics of study.  Her peer-reviewed articles have been published in a number of scientific journals.

dr julie beischel
According to its website (, the Windbridge Institute “is concerned with asking: What can we do with the potential that exists within our bodies, minds, and spirits?  Can we heal each other?  Ourselves?  Can we affect events and physical reality with our thoughts?  Can we know things before they happen?  Are we connected to each other?  To the planet?  Can we communicate with our loved ones who have passed?”

I recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Beischel for the December issue of “The Searchlight,” a quarterly publication of the Academy of Spirituality and Paranormal Studies, Inc.
(  Here is that interview:

How did you become interested in psychical research and mediumship?

“Science has always been in my blood, but it was always the more traditional sciences.  I didn’t even know what a medium was until questions about the afterlife showed up in my backyard.  When my mother committed suicide when I was 24, I turned to science for the answers to my questions.  Through a series of interesting “coincidences,” I was able to begin performing survival and mediumship research after I received my PhD in 2003 and I have been doing so ever since.  I quickly discovered that there was something interesting going on and a lot of research questions that still needed answers.”

Where does the name Windbridge come from?

“When Mark Boccuzzi and I decided to start our own independent research institute almost three years ago, we wanted a name that referenced the dichotomy of human existence; one part intangible (mind, spirit, or soul) and one part material (body).  Like spirit, one cannot hold, weigh, or see wind, but it is very powerful.  And like the body, a bridge is quite substantial and allows us to connect with the rest of the world.  ‘Bridge’ also makes reference to a medium’s role as a bridge between this world and the next.”

Your web site states that survival research is your primary focus.  Would you mind summarizing your findings to date relative to survival?
“At this point, we can definitively state from the results of our proof-focused research that certain mediums are capable of what we call anomalous information reception (or AIR).  That is, they can report accurate and specific information about deceased individuals (or discarnates) without any prior knowledge about the discarnates or sitters (the living people interested in hearing from the discarnates), without any feedback during the reading, and without using fraud or deception.  The quintuple-blind protocol we use effectively eliminates all the explanations that a skeptic may claim are responsible for a medium’s apparent accuracy: fraud, experimenter cueing, information so general it could apply to anyone, rater bias, and ‘cold reading’ (a situation in which a medium uses cues from a present sitter to fabricate an ‘accurate’ reading).  The readings take place on the phone between a medium and a blinded experimenter; sitters do not hear the readings as they take place and they later score blinded transcripts.

“Though we can demonstrate AIR, we cannot determine the anomalous source of the mediums’ information using proof-focused research.  In addition to survival of consciousness, the super psi and psychic reservoir theories are also supported by the data.  To address that issue, we use process-focused research in which we systematically investigate the mediums’ experiences.  We have found that—though there are some similarities between mediums’ experiences when receiving psychic information about the living and when communicating with the deceased—they report being able to differentiate between the two varied experiences.  We are still conducting studies on this process-focused research front.

“In addition, we are very interested in applied mediumship research and determining how mediumship readings may be beneficial in society.  Currently, this involves a research program investigating the therapeutic effects of readings from credentialed mediums in the treatment of grief.  From the initial data we have collected, it appears that mediumship readings may indeed have several advantages over both traditional grief therapy and spontaneous personal after-death communication experiences.  I am excited to start a larger study on this topic once we can locate funding for such a project.”

The old researchers like Myers, Hodgson, Lodge, Hyslop, et al., at some point professed a belief in survival, but many of today’s researchers seem to think that they must forever remain on the fence if they are to be perceived as “scientific.”  What is your position on that?  If you find evidence strongly suggesting survival and publish that, do you suddenly become a propagandist rather than a scientist?
“It’s a fine line around which I continue to tip-toe.  Back in my traditional science days, no one would ever refer to me as a “believer” in the effect of a drug or a virus on the body, but if I were to announce that mediums can report accurate information about the deceased under blinded conditions (which I regularly do), I run the risk of being labeled a proponent or believer and viewed as some kind of zealot even though I am simply drawing the appropriate conclusion from the statistics performed on data collected using a properly designed protocol.  It is a strange position in which scientists in other fields do not find themselves.

“However, I would like to point out that the modern mediumship research era differs considerably from the early days of the Society for Psychical Research in its use of technology (for example, digital recording, e-mail scoring, three-way phone calls, etc.) as well as the characteristics of the medium participants (for example, the Windbridge Certified Research Mediums do not enter a trance state during readings and do not associate their mediumship with a specific religious belief system such as Spiritualism), so grouping all the data together may not be appropriate.  Thus, the new era is still in its infancy and I truly don’t think enough data has been collected to make any firm conclusions about the source of mediums’ information.  I will say that taking into account only the proof- and process-focused mediumship data I have collected myself, I am certainly leaning toward survival and away from the alternative psi hypotheses.”

What is the focus of your current research?

“Currently, to provide more evidence regarding anomalous information reception, we are collecting data to replicate and extend a previously published proof-focused study.  We are also screening new prospective Windbridge Certified Research Mediums and collecting phenomenological data about mediums’ experiences during communication which will allow us to determine if any specific dimensions of consciousness correlate with reading accuracy.  We also recently completed an instrumental transcommunication (ITC) study of real-time communication using EVPMaker software and presented research on animal psi as well as photographic orbic artifacts at academic conferences.  Perhaps most importantly, we are finishing up a paper proposing the positive therapeutic potential of mediumship readings in the treatment of grief.  (More information about our presentations and papers can be found here:”

Has there been one medium or one case that has been particularly evidential to you?
“One medium or one reading can always be dismissed as a fluke.  Therefore, at the Windbridge Institute, we are interested in collecting data from numerous mediums.  That way, it is more evidential of a widespread phenomenon or ability.

“Personally, I think it is the compilation of all the readings and data I’ve collected together that provides the most evidence.  It is witnessing over and over numerous mediums able to report accurate and specific information about the deceased under effectively blinded conditions and observing what seems to be communication with a volitional entity rather than the acquisition of information stored in some kind of etheric database.”

What has been the biggest obstacle in your research?

“Without question: funding.  Survival of consciousness is not an area of research funded by any government grants or by any but a handful of private foundations.  I have noticed that the lay public sometimes assumes that scientists do the research that they want to do when the reality is that all but a few scientists simply do the research they can get funded to do.  This is true everywhere—at universities, for example, research is paid for by grants (and sometimes by private donations), not by the university.  I do not fit into that majority of scientists and my position out here in the fringe is both a blessing and a curse: I get to perform research that interests me and that I find monumentally important and socially relevant but, at the same time, I cannot afford luxuries like health insurance, a car manufactured during this century, or restaurant food.  It is not surprising that more people aren’t working in this field and that it takes so long for us to accomplish anything: I can’t afford the necessary equipment and personnel to perform the types and number of studies I’d like to do.”

Based on history, mainstream science will never accept evidence for survival or even for ESP in general.  Do you see your research as being able to make a dent in that mindset?

“We don’t worry about what the mainstream has to say about anything.  Changes don’t come about in the mainstream; they happen at the edges.  Our focus is on the practical social applications of survival research—how it can serve society—and a mediumship reading isn’t going to help heal a grieving parent or spouse any less based on what the currently accepted mainstream paradigm happens to be.”

How can people get involved with the Windbridge Institute?

“There are a number of simple ways people can stay connected with us online.  For example, people can sign up to volunteer as research sitters (, find us on Facebook (, check out my blog (“”) or become members  More ways to get involved and stay connected can be found by visiting  Thank you for your interest in independent research at the Windbridge Institute!”

Michael Tymn is the author of The Afterlife Revealed: What Happens After We Die, Resurrecting Leonora Piper: How Science Discovered the Afterlife and Dead Men Talking: Afterlife Communication from World War I.


Patient O

I suspect you have been watching too many TV mediums, although I have seen a number of them get the full names and not just the first initial.  It appears that you are not familiar with the extensive psychical research carried out by renowned scientists of the late 1800s and early 1900s.  That research is as solid today as it was then.  Check my book, “Resurrecting Leonora Piper.”

As for the quintuple blind study,  Dr Beischel explains that in one of the questions above and I see no need to repeat what she has already explained.

Michael Tymn, Fri 16 Oct, 22:02

This is not proof of any psychic ability or mediumship. How can it be quadruple blind, especially if the medium is speaking to the sitter !!? That is not even double blind. She hardly went into detail about exactly how the tests work. What I don’t understand is all the mediums that I have see only get a letter of the dead person’s name and they don’t even know who, in the audience, it’s coming from, and even once they start the cold reading they just say the most obvious thing that anyone can pull out their backside. It is a very very simple experiment, just tell them to guess if there is person in the room next to them. That has got to be very very easy but I bet no one gets better than 50/50. If it were a real ability it would be a real science, but it isn’t. It’s not like hundreds of people haven’t researched it. I mean, how long do you need to drop rocks into a pond to realise they don’t float ?

Patient 0, Thu 15 Oct, 16:30

I really wish y’all would stop using the “D” word. It’s not what we ever are and I really can’t stand seeing it. Get rid of it.

john joseph, Sat 5 Feb, 08:33

Thank you for your very astute comment. From a pure science standpoint, the survival hypothesis apparently must remain just a hypothesis, but this whole subject matter falls more into the area of courtroom science and the best that can be done is to meet the “preponderance of evidence standard” at the minimum or better yet, the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.
I had planned to address the Superpsi issue in a future blog, but for the time being I will just quote researcher Minot Savage:
“If anyone chooses to assume that the subliminal consciousness of somebody can do any conceivable thing; travel over the world and find out any conceivable item of knowledge; tell of things that nobody in the world knows; resurrect facts from a long-distant past, and move physical objects without contact – if, I say, anyone chooses to assume a theory like this, why there is nobody who can prevent his doing it. But if he claims that it is scientific, or that there are any known facts or adequate reasons for such an assumption, then I submit that he will be likely to place under suspicion his reputation as a sane, fair-minded, and careful investigator.”
One might also ask why the subconscious self is so intent on deceiving.  Why does it continually claim to be a spirit of the dead?  What is its motivation in this regard?

Aloha!. Michael Tymn

Jon, Wed 26 Jan, 04:53

Yeah great interview. I do want to remark though that whilst the evidence for paranormal/psi phenomena from mediumship is considerable, even overwhelming; the discarnate spirit hypothesis is still just that, a hypothesis. Personally I am more impressed by the super-psi hypothesis. Philosopher Stephen Braude’s sophisticated critiques here and objections to the discarnate/survival hypothesis remain considerable. Ian Wilson’s writings here are also first-rate.

The history of mediumship so obviously reveals the work of the subconscious and even a collective unconscious at work. Given the advances in abnormal psychology inclusive of multiple personality disorder and the like, to discount the role of the hidden mind in toto merely because there are some cases in which the survival hypothesis is equally credible or plausible, is perhaps to be guilty of not a strict enough rigour and genuine skepticism as well as revealing the need for a more comprehensive and subtle multi-discipline approach to the controversies herein. Yes I know the mysteries of mediumship do elicit a multi-discipline coverage, I just think it needs to be stretched out even further and deeper and made more conspicuous.   

A pertinent irony is that many pro-survival hypothesis researchers are well aware of and trumpet the evidence for paranormal phenomena as a whole, notably the strong remote viewing evidence, telepathy, macro PK, synchronicity, paranormal healing etc along with the powers of the subconscious mind; yet I feel they are all too willing to overlook this super-psi when it comes to mediumship, or at least fail to make adequate allowance for its reach.

That criticism aside, Beischel should be commended not only for her admirable work but her recognition that mainstream science is part of the problem and cannot be made to come around. Their loss. Too many parapsychologists have been too desperate for mainstream respectability which will never come, nor should it be sought. The rule of scientific materialism in the halls of science and academia means that all aspects of parapsychology cannot be admitted to be remotely plausible among the mainstream elites (look at the very recent and ongoing hysterical response to the Daryl Bem paper on anomalous cognition, they cannot give an inch here as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link) and that is that. It really is fairly basic undergrad level psychology - cognitive dissonance - to understand why the world of psi is out of bounds. Of course it is more complex than that, but to oversimplify..

zephyr, Tue 25 Jan, 00:37

D Magnun,

Yes, my comment to Marcel did disappear.  I have no idea what happened to it. The link is

Michael Tymn, Wed 5 Jan, 14:33

Your previous post about Dr. Laubscher giving the link to your biography of him seems to have disappeared.

d magnan, Wed 5 Jan, 04:26


Thank you for the comment.  See the reference I left for Marcel Cairo under the previous comment re Dr. Bernard Laubscher.  As Laubscher saw it, much of the blame for society’s ills can be put on academia’s resistance to spiritual truths. It is unfortunate that there are so few professors who have your grasp of spritual matters. You are one of my heroes.

Michael Tymn, Thu 30 Dec, 15:00

As an often lampooned academic Ph.D., I identify with Dr. Beischel. I have mostly given up trying to win respect for my “eccentric” interests in afterlife research, especially mediumship.  Some of us are destined to live in isolation and without funding, but better that than to cave in and follow the herd—and the money.  I look forward to meeting her at the upcoming afterlife conference in Phoenix, April 30-May 1.

Stafford Betty, Thu 30 Dec, 04:23

Nice interview, Michael.  Just curious, since you and I differed in the past on this topic, but did you ask Dr. Beischel about physical mediumship? I would have loved to hear her response to that question.

Marcel Cairo, Wed 29 Dec, 03:49

Add your comment



Your comment

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

Please note that all comments are read and approved before they appear on the website

translate this page
The Only Planet of Choice: Visitations – Many people use the word ‘Alien’ to describe a visitor from outer space. Extra terrestrial is another word, which is rather more user friendly. For the sake of the question and answer format, the word used by the questioner has been left, though even Tom questions our use of‘Alien’. Should we wish to foster openess between all beings of the Universe perhaps we should also look at our vocabulary? In a discussion between Andrew and Tom many years earlier, Andrew had asked Tom about UFOs and whether they were created manifestations. Tom had replied: “Many of the flying things that you call UFOs come from our place, but they come from other places also, and they do come in physical form. But many of them are not physical. They are like your movie screen”. Read here
© White Crow Books | About us | Contact us | Privacy policy | Author submissions | Trade orders