I am done with spot-checking my sequel, "Mathew Franklin Whittier in his own world," and done with archiving. There are two research queries pending, which may not get answered: 1) was the hill, near my present apartment, which triggered a past-life glimpse, lowered to accommodate the road before, or after Mathew and Abby might have traversed it? and, 2) in 1845, would a female reporter have been permitted in the engine room of a new super-steamship, at dock in New York City? The reason for the first is that I seem to have remembered the hill being a bigger deal to climb than its current height would suggest; so if it was actually steeper in 1839/40, that would be mildly evidential. The second is because the asterisk-signing author, reporting for the New York "Tribune," clearly suggests, in poetic language, that he or she was permitted to tour the engine room of the newly-launched steamship "Great Britain." If a woman would in no case have been permitted there in 1845, then the author cannot have been Margaret Fuller, as historians claim. I found an online forum of old ship enthusiasts (I don't know their ages), but so far the only response is a ribald comment regarding how sexy the woman was. He used a long word I've never heard of, which means, essentially, "sexy."
And that brings us to a couple of reincarnation authors I ran across recently. The first, Bob Good, has a long, two-part video of a presentation he gave before an audience on the Science of Reincarnation. He seems to present much the same evidence I used to present on this website, before I began researching my own case; and, in fact, he showed a clip from my 2007 video interview with Dr. Jim Tucker. I wrote him, saying I was glad he had been able to make use of that video (which I had published anonymously), and suggested that we might want to communicate. Several days later, I got a very terse reply suggesting I might want to read his book, posted on his website, on "The Mathematics of Reincarnation." No "Oh, you're the fellow who shot that video of Tucker," or "I like your website," or "I'd be interested to learn more about your case." So I perused his online book, and the mathematics I saw had to do with refuting a skeptic's statistical dismissal of one of Dr. Ian Stevenson's cases, taken in isolation. (I wrote, I think it was last entry, that skeptics like to take evidence in isolation.)
Not to be disparaging, but my impression is that Mr. Good's science is other people's science, but that he, himself, doesn't have a very sharp, scientific mind. At least, not so much as he seems to think he does. But he appears to be doing good work presenting the evidence, which has a value in itself. Perhaps, like Carol Bowman, he has a competitive streak, and that's why he responded as he did. But let's face it, if anyone wants to go down in history as "Mr. Reincarnation" or "Ms. Reincarnation," they will have to get in line behind a whole bunch of people, including Dr. Ian Stevenson, Dr. Peter Ramster, the Theosophists, Benjamin Franklin, and Pythagoras. (I'll get behind Carol, and Bob can get behind me.)
The second reincarnation author I ran across appears to be in academia. He has a book* about reincarnation--primarily, about Native American beliefs in reincarnation--the e-book version of which you can purchase at a modest $98.00. But there is quite a bit of it there in the online sample. He begins by calling reincarnation a "belief," and thus immediately sets the tone, and establishes his subject, as the academic study of the belief of reincarnation among this or that group. Already he has missed the boat. There is enough evidence, now, to logically take reincarnation as a phenomenon. One can talk about different intellectual approaches to a phenomenon--but it is fundamentally misleading to subtly denegrate a phenomenon as a mere belief, and to fool your audience into thinking you are going to discuss the phenomenon, itself. This is a form of reductionistic slight-of-hand.
He then proceeds to separate everything (i.e., all the beliefs) into categories. Dividing labeled things into categories is the poor man's excuse for understanding. Seeing how every leaf and branch relates to the trunk, and how the trunk relates to the roots, is understanding. So notwithstanding that this report is extremely detailed and precise, and that the author, given a choice, will use a big word instead of a small one at every opportunity, I think it is not worth the $98.00; and accordingly, I didn't purchase it.
This is Dr. E. Goethe Digg, a fictitious representation of academia by whom Mathew lampooned that institution in 1851. This series was attributed to a career principal named Benjamin Drew by the editor, B.P. Shillaber--but it was actually written by Mathew Franklin Whittier (myself). The evidence is in my first book.
For those of you who haven't seen this before, note that one of his diplomas on the wall proclaims, "Dr. Digg A.S.S." I would love to share a sample of Dr. Digg...let's see if I have a pdf I can snag quickly.
Here is one of the best ones, from the "Carpet-Bag" of May 8, 1852, on the "Treatment of Bore." Bores are among Mathew's favorite subjects. I have one in the Portland "Transcript" from 1848 (three years after the New York "Tribune" reviews") signed with his asterisk; one of the most famous parodies of "The Raven," called "The Vulture," first appeared, unsigned, in the "Carpet-Bag" of Dec. 18, 1852, on this same topic (written by Mathew); and there are a number of others. An obituary of Mathew's brother, John Greenleaf Whittier, published in a British paper, gives a brief (and semi-accurate) account of Mathew deliberately losing bores in the city streets.
Mathew also launched the "Ensign Stebbings" series, a parody of the military mentality. But the other contributors to the Carpet-Bag quickly jumped on the band wagon. What you see below the "Dr. Digg" piece is probably one of the other writers.
One more thing and I'll close and get ready for work. I caught yet another YouTube video last night, demonstrating via details of the Martian landscape in the NASA photographs, that the surface of Mars is clearly a debris field, resulting from an ancient catalysm. The evidence is overwhelming that this is the correct interpretation; and, obviously, that it is being covered up. This presenter kept hammering home the strength of mind it takes to break through the social brainwashing and conditioning which has Society believing Mars is just a dusty rock. The officials have, finally, admitted there was water there (and then, I think, that there is water there). But there is good scientific evidence that there was once one (actually, two) huge atomic blasts on Mars, which wiped out the planet. I found one of these artificial structures in a NASA photo, myself; but there are so many of them, and some of them are so obviously artificial, that there's no question about it. Ever see a rock that looks like this? With a different-colored cap on the end?
There's a pie-shaped object just behind it I never noticed, before. It has a very straight edge, but then the next edge adjoining it is a perfect semi-circle. It appears to have been part of a very regularly-shaped disc. I've never seen anything like that in nature, either. Turns out the Martian landscape is littered with stuff like this. Some of it, according to one presenter, NASA Photoshopped over; but they missed quite a bit of it.
Oh, one of the cases Bob Good cites in his lecture is that of actor Glenn Close. Close's evidence is better than mine--he spoke a 17th-century French dialect under hypnosis, when remembering a life of that era; they found the name and grave of another past life personality, in England; and I believe he was able to play piano expertly, when immersed in the life of a piano teacher. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find the source data for this case. All I can find, in a quick perusal, is second-hand reports of it.
But my evidence isn't too far behind. In the Appendix of my first book, are writing samples including humor, journalism, and creative writing, which parallel Mathew's style and skill.** Of course, all three were written by me before I discovered Mathew's existence, in 2005. This very blog stands as testimony that I can crank out a quality column on a daily basis (and that, for years on end). I had a few past-life memories as strongly verified as Close's memories. And in one of my past-life hypnotic regressions, out of the blue, I seemingly remembered meeting Edgar Allan Poe. One of the two psychics I used, said that it would be possible to verify that meeting, but it would take a great deal of digging into the historical record. Now, I have proven that Mathew claimed that Poe stole "The Raven" from him, when both were critics writing for two different major New York City newspapers. So that's pretty strong.*** At the time of the regression, I had no particular interest in, nor admiration for, Edgar Allan Poe. Only "The Raven" impressed me, inasmuch as when I first encountered it in grade school, I was unable to finish reading it because of the powerful feelings of grief for a lost soul-mate that it triggered. I'm not exaggerating. I was in either fifth or sixth grade (I think, sixth), started reading this poem as part of our text assignment, and couldn't get through it for the reasons stated. I had always known I'd lost someone like this, on some level. This wasn't the first time I had sensed it--but I had no conceptual framework with which to process it. I had been raised in an atheistic home.
That's not all, but the point is, my case is really not inferior to Close's. Bob Good doesn't know what he missed. But really-speaking, I'm more and more convinced it's just as well. I not only want somebody, anybody to get my work out in front of the public. I need somebody who really understands it--and I haven't run across that person, yet.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
*"Reincarnation in America: An Esoteric History," by Lee Irwin, 2017. Note that my documentary, "In Another Life: Reincarnation in America" was released in 2003, and made available to universities through Films Media Group. Perhaps Mr. Irwin could have given a tip-o-the-hat to my film, if he wanted to so closely mirror my title; or, he could have called it "American Reincarnation," or "Reincarnation in the Americas." But then, you see, when you're a nobody, people feel like it's almost ethical to borrow from your work just on that basis. Nobodies have no rights, by definition. (My e-book and its sequel are $12.00 each.)
**I have had no formal training in journalism or creative writing, and the only Rules of Grammar I know are "Wipe your feet before you come in the kitchen," and "No cookies before dinner." But I write good, and occasionally I'm amusing.
***The evidence suggests about a month-long window when the meeting could have taken place--as I recall, now, it would have been in Dec. of 1842, or Jan. of 1843. Abby died in March of 1841, so "The Raven" would have been a poem of relatively fresh grief, as it appears to be. Poe was not in grief, and claims to have written it as a sort of academic exercise. Of course, the evidence is presented in detail in my books.
Music opening this page: "Brilliant Room," by Eric Johnson,
from the album "Up Close"