Censored in Great BritainTHE SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF SURVIVAL AFTER DEATHBy Michael Roll
Here is an extraordinary paradox. Only those who can be relied upon to dismiss the findings and conclusions of our pioneers of radio and television are allowed on radio and television! Our scientists who support the British pioneers of radio and television - Sir William Crookes, Sir Oliver Lodge and John Logie Baird - have been blocked from speaking on the radio or appearing on television. Only a handful of local radio presenters have defied this official and unofficial censorship, notably James Whale. There are two expert opinions as to what so-called paranormal phenomena are, but in this "free" country the British people are only allowed access to the explanation that is politically correct, the first version that is listed below, because it is no danger to the powerful religious and scientific establishments: 1. Paranormal Phenomena Do Not ExistThe mind and the brain are the same. This is the official teaching across all scientific disciplines. The parapsychologist Dr. Susan Blackmore has been given complete freedom of every radio and television programme that is meant to be examining the subject. This is because she is the establishment mouthpiece and can be relied upon to never mention what is revealed in this pamphlet. Dr. Blackmore protects the scientific establishment's adopted stance, which only gives a materialistic model of the universe. Professor J. Wheeler, a top physicist, stated in 1994 that acceptance of survival or paranormal phenomena would destroy the basis of science as taught in our universities. 2. Paranormal Phenomena Do ExistThe mind and the brain are separate. This pamphlet carries on where Crookes, Lodge and Logie Baird left off. This is what we are never allowed to hear on radio and television or read about in scientific magazines and large circulation papers. "The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, it has no place in the endeavour of science." Carl Sagan. "Cosmos" 1980
A great moment in television history was featured in Carl Sagan's outstanding thirteen-part series on astronomy called "Cosmos". He was pictured in New York library surrounded by millions of books. He pointed to a tiny section and said: "It is only possible in one person's lifetime to read this many books." He then turned to the camera and made the following profound statement: "The trick is to read the right books." The books discussed in this pamphlet are the ones that the religious and pseudo-scientific establishments are praying with all their might that the people never find out about.
"I completely agree with Michael Roll's arguments about the reality of paranormal phenomena and the existence of a normally unseen world... Quantum Physics: the presence of a wave nature in subatomic particles. The vital difference between a wave and a solid particle is the wave properties of superposition and modulation. Put simply, these properties allow waves of different frequencies to occupy the same space without direct interaction. Therefore it is quite possible for parallel universes to exist separated by a difference in some fundamental wave characteristic. This theory springs directly from wave mechanics which unfortunately was not available to the Victorian researchers when the greatest breakthroughs with mediumship were made." Michael Scott BSc. Graduate in Astrophysics, Edinburgh University
WHAT IS MEANT BY SCIENTIFIC PROOF?This must consist of repeatable experiments backed up with a theory that has a mathematical base. A good example is proving that the world is round and not flat. The Greek scientist Pythagoras was the first to put forward the idea that the world was round. This was 2,600 years ago. However, it was 300 years later that another Greek scientist - Eratosthenes - came up with the mathematical theory for a round earth. This lacked the scientific impact it should have had because the experiment had not taken place. This came much later when Magellan's crew sailed round the world in 1522. The experiment together with the mathematical theory completely, destroyed the medieval obscurants - the Flat Earth religious fanatics. Proving survival after death is exactly the same, but not quite as easy, because here we are dealing with phenomena that are beyond the range of our five physical senses. In order to detect this type of phenomena we have to work with a medium - a machine that can do the job. It was the invention of the achromatic microscope in 1830 by Joseph Jackson Lister that enabled his son to write his paper on antiseptic surgery. From this moment on we have had the proof that reality also exists in the invisible. Radio and television sets are also detecting normally invisible phenomena. They are mediums sorting out signals at different frequencies. This is the reason why we are forced to work with a human medium in order to prove survival after death. No machine invented so far is as sophisticated as the human mind and brain. However we have to be extra careful when carrying out experiments using people. There can be no room for error where lives are concerned.
THE EXPERIMENTAL PROOF OF SURVIVAL AFTER DEATHWe have had the experimental proof of survival after death ever since Sir William Crookes published the results of his experiments in the leading scientific journal of his day - The Quarterly Journal of Science - in 1874. These were repeatable experiments under laboratory conditions. International teams of scientists then repeated the experiments and obtained the same results. People who had once lived on earth came back and proved to these scientific teams that they had conquered death and were still very much alive. This is what Professor Charles Richet, the French Nobel Laureate for medical science, said about the experiments: "There is ample proof that experimental materialisations should take definite rank as a scientific fact."
The purpose of this pamphlet is only to bring to peoples' attention these exciting discoveries in subatomic physics. My job is easy, all I have to do is point to the books that have been published, but suppressed. The main reason why this incredible scientific discovery did not cause a revolution at the beginning of this century is because these experiments lacked the backing of any detailed mathematical theory. This is what Sir Oliver Lodge said in 1929: "We have to be guided by the facts; and if the facts seem incredible as the they do - we have first of all to assure ourselves that they are facts, and then conclude that there is a department of knowledge to which we have as yet not got the key."
At the end of the century we now have the key, the missing mathematical theory to back up these revolutionary, scientific experiments. ReferencesLodge, Sir Oliver "Phantom Walls" 1929 (Hodder & Stoughton) Medhurst, Dr. R.G. "Crookes and the Spirit World" 1972 (Souvenir) Crookes, Sir William "Experimental Investigation of a New Force" Article in "Quarterly Journal of Science" July 1, 1871 (Early experiments) Richet, Professor Charles "Thirty Years of Psychical Research" 1923 (W. Collins & Sons). The French scientific team. von Schrenck Notzing, Baron "Phenomena of Materialisations" 1923 (Kegan Paul. Trench. Trubner). The German scientific team. Hamilton, Dr. T. Glen "Intention and Survival" 1942. (Regency Press) The Canadian scientific team. Warrick, F. W. "Experiments in Psychics" 1939 (Rider & Co. London)
THE ETHERIC WORLD MUST HAVE AN ASTRONOMICAL LOCALITYAs Sir Oliver Lodge and Sir William Crookes were pioneers of radio and television, they were able to put forward a rational explanation to account for the seemingly "supernatural" phenomena appearing at their experiments. They said that this etheric world is the same place as our radio and television signals, but at a much higher frequency. Recent discoveries in quantum mechanics - the study of the building blocks within the atom - completely vindicate what these great physicists said at the beginning of the century. They were adamant that we all survive the death of our physical bodies. The experiments proved that we must possess two bodies - one finite body containing the brain that dies, and another infinite body, containing the mind that separates when our short stay on earth is over. Lodge said the people from the "next world" who are appearing at the experiments must possess bodies that are made of the same invisible matter as our radio and television signals. He called it an etheric substance. Few will disagree that the discovery of this etheric substance is the most important scientific breakthrough in history. I must admit to jumping the gun and getting overexcited when I saw a report in the "Sunday Times" on 13th December 1981. It said that physicists could have been wrong for forty years about the make-up of the universe. They were saying that nine tenths of the universe is missing. When we look through a telescope at a galaxy we are only seeing one tenth of the mass. The motion of distant galaxies and the stars in them can only be accounted for under the laws of gravity if there is far more mass associated with each galaxy than there is in the visible stars that comprise it. One theory for this missing mass was centred around a ghostlike subatomic particle called the neutrino that was discovered in 1956. The report said a neutrino would stand a good chance of penetrating a thickness of lead stretching to the nearest star without hitting anything. This really caught my imagination. Arthur Koestler showed in his book "The Roots of Coincidence" that science had discovered something in the building blocks of nature that started to give a rational explanation accounting for the millions of reports from people who say they saw a "ghost" walk through a solid wall. However, my astrophysicist pals Mike Scott and Sam Nicholls, although very supportive of the survival theory, did not share my enthusiasm that the neutrino was the missing piece needed to make up the etheric universe. ReferencesLodge, Sir Oliver "Ether and Reality" 1925 (Hodder & Stoughton) Koestler, Arthur "The Roots of Coincidence" 1972 (Hutchinson)
RONALD PEARSON BSc DISCOVERS THE UNSEEN AND NORMALLY UNSENSED UNIVERSE"It was Einstein's materialistic Theory of Relativity that destroyed Sir Oliver Lodge's Theory of the Ether." Sam Nicholls MSc
With the benefit of hindsight we now know that a scientific disaster took place when Sir Isaac Newton's model of the universe was discarded and replaced by Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Einstein said on his 70th birthday: "Now you think I am looking at my life's work with calm satisfaction. But there is not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm. I am not sure if I was on the right track after all."
If only our contemporary physicists had shared Einstein's scepticism then we would not have wasted so much time and money trying to match up Niels Bohr's quantum mechanics with relativity. Even the Einstein supporter Professor Stephen Hawking from Cambridge University admits that they are incompatible. Apart from in Russia and a few "heretics" in the West, the whole of orthodox science is locked into a largely false and hopelessly outdated scientific theory. We are being subjected to one extraordinary theory after another, ranging from us being able to go back in time and murder our grandparents and then to somehow be born in another universe, to the questionable Big Bang theory that says every galaxy in the universe started from the size of a pin head at a single point in time! This is the sort of scenario we end up with if we start our calculations from a false base. Only those of us who are outside of the university sausage machine are in a position to challenge orthodox scientific thinking. The physics students are powerless. They would not get their degrees if they told the truth. They know what happened to one of our leading scientists who had the courage to say Einstein's Theory of Relativity is incorrect. Dr. Louis Essen D.Sc. FRS, OBE, is the inventor of the atomic clock. For trying to bring common sense back into physics he was told further such activity would place the tenure of his post in jeopardy. Into this scientific vacuum has stepped a retired university lecturer with a background in engineering, Ronald Pearson from Bath. Thankfully, Mr. Pearson no longer has to watch out for peer pressure in order to keep his university appointment. However, he is still at the mercy of the peer-referee system. This is just a euphemism for censorship - keeping the old-boy network intact. Before any scientific theory can see the light of day it has to run the gauntlet of politically correct scientists who are worshipping at the shrine of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. This way no constructive criticism ever comes to the attention of students or the public in quality scientific magazines, the press or on radio and television. Engineers do not have the freedom to indulge in any scientific flights of fancy, otherwise all their structures will come tumbling down and their machines will blow up or crash. These practical men and women act as a sort of scientific brake. This is why many of the world's greatest scientists have come from the ranks of engineers. Ronald Pearson has discovered Sir Oliver Lodge's etheric substance and outside of Russia hardly anybody knows about it! He has completely discarded Einstein's outdated Theory of Relativity and just made a couple of additions to Sir Isaac Newton's physical laws. They now match up with quantum mechanics and provide a totally satisfactory solution for quantum gravitation. Mr. Pearson attended the Sir Isaac Newton Conference in 1991, which was held in St. Petersburg, Russia. His scientific paper has been well received and published. This outstanding British scientist is recognised in Russia, but has not even been reported in his own country. He has been peer-refereed out of the game. As a rugby player this makes me very angry because I was brought up with great respect for the good word of referee. It is obvious that what Mr. Pearson has discovered is much too close to the truth for comfort, because if his work was a load of rubbish it would be brought out in the open and exposed. This great scientific breakthrough actually started in 1933 when Pauli predicted that there may well be particles within the atom other than the proton, electron and the recently discovered neutron that would revolutionise scientific thinking. We have now discovered over 200 subatomic particles making up our physical universe, coming under the general heading of quarks and leptons. In order to discover the etheric world Mr. Pearson has taken a step further and pointed out that everything we have discovered so far within the atom is being produced from smaller primary particles at a sub-quantum level. His mathematically based theory proves that when primaries of positive and negative energy collide they breed! This yields an exciting new mechanism for the creation of an expanding universe. This is similar to what we are witnessing in nature all around us. An equation we can all immediately understand. Male + Female = New Individuals. It is never a bad rule of thumb to look around at nature's wonders when we are trying to find the answers to cosmic mysteries. When we consider that even a solid lump of granite consists of mostly empty space and even the building blocks of the "solid" bits protons, neutrons and electrons cannot be seen even under the most powerful microscopes. Therefore, it is no longer so fantastic to accept the seemingly crazy idea that the life force that drives our physical body on earth can continue when it packs in ("gives up the ghost"). For example, on a television interview just prior to his death in 1988, Professor Richard P. Feynman, a Nobel Laureate for Physics, made the following statement. "If your theories and mathematics do not match the experiment, then they are wrong."
Einstein's Theory of Relativity cannot match the experiment where people who once lived on earth come back and prove they are still alive, because this theory is incompatible with even the very existence of an ether. Ronald Pearson's Theory of the Ether most certainly does. It shows the ether having a complex structure, intelligence and conscious, to be the core ingredient. The great strength of the powerful materialists who control orthodox scientific thinking is that they are banking on the fact that most people are not making an effort to understand even basic subatomic physics. Even a cursory glance at the subject shows that the physical universe is being produced from the invisible - the etheric universe. Please spike the guns of the "when-you're-dead,-you're-dead" merchants. Read Professor Richard Feynman's layman's guide to subatomic physics obtainable from bookshops and the library - QED. Once people have read the physicists' and rationalists' case explaining so-called paranormal phenomena they automatically become immune from falling for any supernatural absurdities. Never again will the masses fall under the spell of priestcraft. Never again will people be fooled by pseudo-scientists who are guilty of suppressing uncomfortable discoveries in physics solely to keep their power structures intact. ReferencesPearson, R.D. "Intelligence Behind The Universe" This shows how enlightened physics can explain the so-called paranormal and solve the most intractable problems of cosmology. Pearson, R.D. "Origin of Mind". This is Mr. Pearson's lecture showing that our minds are immortal. Pearson's thesis now published in the U.S.A. by the Center for Frontier Sciences - Temple University. Philadelphia. He is still censored in his own country up to March, 1998. Pearson, R.D. "Key To Consciousness: Quantum - Gravitation". You can order the above publications by writing to Michael Roll. Feynman, Richard P. "QED". 1985 (Princeton University press) Essen, Dr. Louis D.Sc. FRS. OBE. "Relativity - Joke or Swindle?" (Electronics & Wireless World). This criticism of Einstein's Theory of Relativity by the inventor of the atomic clock is censored in all mainstream scientific publications. It was Rutherford who thought Einstein's Theory of Relativity was a joke! "Quarks and Leptons: The New Elementary Particles?" Proceedings of The Royal Society of London. 8th April, 1986.
| 
