My Friend, the Trance Channel, Kevin Ryerson

I met Walter Semkiw, M.D.,, at a party (at my house, actually), and subsequently spent some time looking at his materials.

The problem I have with it is that … well *I’m* John Adams, not that other guy.

Seriously, I think the idea of serial reincarnation … one person reincarnating as someone else … is (except perhaps in the case of great Tibetan leaders) pretty unlikely. I think that something like a “soul stew” is much more likely, whereupon when we die, our individual “soul essence” gets put back into a big soul stew pot and then a ladle-full containing bits and pieces of lots of different folks gets served out into the next body that needs enlivening. (Obiously, my metaphor is weak here in a number of ways, but you get the point.)

Plus, of course, there’s the big problem, oft-repeated, that everyone seems to think they were someone extremely important or well-known. How many people say, “Yeah, I was that slave three hundred years ago and before that a peasant farmer in Europe and before that nobody worth noting at all.”

Also, the idea that through matching physical face attributes we can tell “who was who” reminds me of the Phrenology bust I have sitting on my desk. It just doesn’t feel right or make sense to me.

I think a lot of this originates from the fear of death. We all (or a lot of us all) want to live forever, or would like to believe that we might…

– Jordan

I did not realize that he did not have a linear, or serial, reincarnation model. I should study it more closely.

Your point about the Egypitans is likewise fascinating. I’ll have to study that too!

Obviusly Not Galileo in a former life,

Jordan

Walter Semkiw takes someone who was famous in the past and always links them to
someone who is famous in the present time.  Walter Semkiw
never links, for example, George Washington (the first president of
the United States) to Joe Q. Smith in Toledo, Ohio or Abdul Mohammed
in Baghdad, Iraq (i.e. common everyday people that no one ever heard
of).  He always links famous people to famous people.
 
let me tell you, I proved Kevin Ryerson to be a complete fraud.
Ahtun Re is no entity that he channels, it is a character that
he pretends to be and does a voice for.  Kevin is a good actor and can
do different characters and voices, but that is about it.
As you correctly point out, Kevin Ryerson always "confirms" whatever
match Walter Semkiw makes (for a fee, I might add).
What amazing luck!!!  Every match Walter Semkiw makes is confirmed as
correct by Kevin Ryerson and Ahtun Re.
With that kind of luck, Walter Semkiw should forget about making past
life matches and hit the casinos in Vegas!!!!
 
After reading Walter Semkiw's stuff for the first time several years
ago, I became curious about Kevin Ryerson and actually
scheduled a telephone session with him.  The amazing Ahtun Re who
claimed to be able to read the Akashic Records was unable to give me
any information about any of my past lives!!!!  However, Ahtun Re
wanted me to tell him who I thought I had been, so that he
could "check" the records and "confirm" whether or not I was correct.
I was floored!!!  I could not believe it.  I actually got into quite
an argument with that "entity", Ahtun Re.  During our discussion, my
phone got cut off (I am not sure if it was due to a cell phone
reception problem or if Kevin Ryerson purposely cut off the call).
Anyway, to add icing to the cake, I call Kevin Ryerson's number back
after I got disconnected, and in the 30 to 45 seconds (it could not
have been more than a minute) it took to call him back and for Kevin
to pick up, Kevin Ryerson (who claims that he is completely
unconscious and has no memory of anything Ahtun Re says when he is
channeling him) knows everything that happened in my conversation with
Ahtun Re.  I asked Kevin how he could know what we talked about.
Kevin says that after the phone disconnected, he came out of the
trance, was able to rewind his tape and play back the conversation
with Ahtun Re (which had lasted several minutes).  Kevin was able to
do all of that in less than a minute???  At that point,
I called Kevin Ryerson's bluff and Kevin got really defensive and
suddenly his "absolutely non-refundable fee" was being cheerfully
refunded and even sent to me by overnight delivery!!!!   I later
e-mailed Semkiw and told him that his research was being tainted by
his association with Ryerson and reliance on Ryerson's "confirmation"
of his matches.  I never got an answer back from Semkiw.
 

Jordan and all,

The perception that “everyone seems to think that they were someone extremely important or well-known” is quite inaccurate. The overwhelming majority of reports by psychologists, therapists and various talented amateurs involve ordinary people who are historically obscure or unknown. I’d be happy to refer you to several bodies of research to demonstrate this if you’re interested.

I’ve collected information on 5 past lives now. I did remember being one person who was “important” enough to be historically documented (an 18th century French aristocrat). He wasn’t well known enough that I’d ever read about it him. I also remembered two who were completely obscure (a civil servant/slave in the Ming Dynasty and a Franciscan monk). I’m collecting information on two others, a Victorian who is likely documented and might even be well known or at least well documented in a relatively specialized area, and one who is surely a completely obscure, unknown person.

I don’t know what to think about Ryerson, but I seriously doubt that he’s just a fake. He also declined to do a reading for me and for some reason, he has quite a number of very vocal detractors on the internet. On his suggestion, I read his book “Spirit Communication: The Soul’s Path” and found him to be both well informed and in command of an unusually clear grasp of his subject matter. I’ve read reams of half-baked psychic theory over the years, and as far as I know, you really can’t fake that kind of understanding or the intelligence that it suggests. For me, that weighs heavily against him being a fraud, complete or otherwise.

Merchandising spiritual information seems to be a very delicate business and I strongly suspect that divulging information of that depth and importance to any promiscuous persons willing to pay the fee whether or not they are personally ready or able to benefit from it wouldn’t be in the best interests of either the reader or the subject. The fact that he is more than willing to decline a reading would make perfect sense if the information he could provide would be deterimental to the subject’s own spiritual direction through life. Information on past lives can be transformative but can also be an incredible distraction if one’s critical issues are based in this one or if one is not yet ready for a transformative experience. 

The criticism of Semkiw’s opinion is common, but also not factually correct. I find Semkiw’s writing style structurally challenging, he writes like he has a nearly photographic memory and I wonder if most of Semkiw’s critics have read much of what he wrote. I passed his 1st book on to around 10 people and not a single one read more than a fraction of it. They all looked at the pictures and judged accordingly. 

Trying to match people based on physical appearance alone is virtually meaningless and Semkiw never endorses doing that. He describes a battery of indicators, including physical appearance. His book also contains a number of cases he had nothing to do with personally that also support his theory.  I’ve made some very interesting matches myself using much the same indicators that he lists including one or two as far back as 1980 that I still think are accurate. I was thrilled to see someone else independently replicate what I’d done because among other reasons, I was finally able to pretty much rule out “delusional thinking” as the source of my inspiration :-).

The Dali Lama said somewhere when asked about karma and reincarnation that it was very complex. I agree. I’ve been chatting and talking about all this non stop for the past few years and it really seems to be a little beyond most people’s ability or inclination to clearly comprehend.

Maybe it’s like that joke backwards… in this case, it’ seems that the dogma has run over the karma.

Peter 

Jordan said,

Plus, of course, there’s the big problem, oft-repeated, that everyone seems to think they were someone extremely important or well-known. How many people say, “Yeah, I was that slave three hundred years ago and before that a peasant farmer in Europe and before that nobody worth noting at all.”

Actually, if you read Dr. Brian Weiss’ work, you will see that when he hypnotically regressed people that was virtually the case universally. Pretty much everyone who was regressed was what you call “nobody worth noting at all” in nearly every lifetime that was revealed. To me, this reinforces my belief that everyone and every life is worth being given honor and profound respect, there is no heirarchy of worthiness or notability.

Yes, I believe Edgar Cayce who also utilized deep trance states akin to
self-hypnosis very rarely found famous past life matches during the
thousands of past life readings that he gave.

Brianstalin considered by many to be the foremost past life expert in the world (http://brianstalin-pastliferesearch.synthasite.com/research.php) points out that neither Cayce nor those under deep hypnosis  really
accessed past life data, but instead experienced screen memories.

According to metaphysical studies and investigations many invisible realms exist and are populated with highly intelligent and negatively oriented
energies that seek to keep humanity in darkness and ignorance.
In fact that seems to be their main role and purpose.

Cling to your belief systems all you want, but it doesn’t necessarily get you
closer to the truth, more likely your lack of open-mindedness and
objectivity will end up being insurmountable barriers to truth and any
possibility of further spiritual growth.

Brianstalin doesn’t mind if you don’t believe or can refute his findings, he actually actively encourages this.

Brianstalin just invites anyone with a keen interest and an open mind to explore higher consciousness to use his simple and direct psychic techniques
and investigate what they experience.

I remind you that Brianstalin has studied from various teachers around the world including the Dalai Lama.

Brianstalin’s matches unlike Semkiw’s and Ryerson’s have been checked and verified by people who can read the Akashic Records and who can also teach other people to do this.

If you are completely satisfied and already made up your mind, then that’s fine, but really there is a lot more to explore.

As for Ryerson being a fake, that’s a distinct possibility. He could just be deluded or be overconfident in his psychic abilities.
What if it turns out that Brianstalin’s abilities are greater?
That could be quite embarrassing!

What reliable techniques does Ryerson and Semkiw use? Looking for parallels and slight facial similarities may have some slight merit, but it is really too subjective and not scientific enough to take seriously.

On the other hand Brianstalin utilizes dowsing techniques that he says are more objective and can be used by anyone to check his findings.

Brianstalin has pioneered mental dowsing where pendulums and rods are replaced by mental or visual sensations, which appear to be more sensitive and accurate than external hand held apparatus depending upon muscular contraction for movement.

Brianstalin points out there is absolutely no scientific proof to support the efficacy of dowsing, but points out that that might just as well highlight the inadequacies of our ability to test dowsing, rather than the inadequacy of dowsing itself.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3449/3367540752_7be9eb12f9_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3369993720_88613c86fb_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3369993724_659e5bb97a_o.jpg

The facial similarities supplied by Brianstalin in the above comparisons were gathered AFTER obtaining data using advanced mental dowsing techniques.

That means unlike subjective comparisons and parallels used to advance past life theories, objective dowsing techniques were used to indicate a match and these matches were investigated AFTERWARDS.

Dowsing is considered be more objective because it involves UNCONSCIOUS muscular contraction found in normal forms of dowsing or UNCONSCIOUS mental sensation/vibrations etc. found in mental dowsing.

The information is, of course, unbelievable, but that does not mean it must be untrue because of that.

Brianstalin points out that each comparison may not necessarily denote an exact past life match, but provides an interesting and more objective starting point for further investigation than many psychic and hypnotic techniques that may well not be so reliable.

Brianstalin cannot prove to us that Semkiw, Ryerson, Cayce and others have got it wrong, but suggests strongly that the onus is on us to try out his techniques for ourselvses before making up our minds.

In the comparison’s of my previous post Brianstalin identifies Janelle Barlow with Anna Akhmatova, Andrew Mishlove with Maxim Gorky and Saul-Paul Sirag
with Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovskii. Thus forming an interesting soul group in Russia.

In addition he proposes a possible match between James P. Driscoll and Alexander Bogdanov.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3618/3371145842_0e89944ef1_o.jpg

The facial comparisons in my opinion are a lot closer than those of Semkiw’s conjectures (and that is all they are!), but I understand that my subjective impressions may be at variance with those of others.

Brianstalin suggests that logic or common sense will not be of much use in helping to assess his findings.

He suggests using dowsing or any other psychic means at our disposal.

If that fails then perhaps psychic training, meditation etc.

Should Brianstalin’s data be considered less worthy of attention than say the data from hypnosis or Semkiw’s theories?

Also check out Brianstalin’s past life readings featured in GarySe7en’s vids on YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/user/GarySe7en

There’s a lot of material to go through and Brianstalin has lots more.

I warn you it’s all very controversial and will challenge all your preconceptions.

My personal experience with Brainstalin has led me to believe he is on to something.  Could my experience be touted as “evidence”?  I do not know. But, I don't know any of these people, even Brainstalin. Stangely though, it is like he somehow pulled inforamtion right out fo my brain by just looking at a picture of me.

breemaborg.blogspot.com