Answers to Common Concerns
Understandably, there are concerns about the SoulPhone technology. Any revolutionary new product has the potential to create changes that are good or not so good. Dr. Schwartz and his team have long anticipated any possible outcomes and answer common concerns below.
Q. When contacting those “on the other side,” might we be intruding upon their rest or privacy?
Two decades of contemporary research with genuine mediums clearly indicate that cooperating spirits want to communicate with their loved ones on earth. “Departed” loved ones and luminaries want to continue to be with us just as we wish to be with them. The evidence reveals that we on earth are not intruding upon the rest or privacy of those in spirit. We are, rather, enabling them to experience and express their love for us and the planet.
Q. By contacting “the deceased” with the SoulPhone, would we be holding them in one place and interfering with their progress to higher levels?
The evidence from mediumship science clearly indicates that spirits have "choice" just like we do. They can choose to "move on" and / or they can choose to remain connected with their loved ones here on the earth. They are not "slaves" to our emotions and needs.
When Rhonda Schwartz first began having communication with her mother who was in spirit, Rhonda asked if she was holding her mother back in some way by continuing the relationship. It became clear to Rhonda that her mother wanted to continue the interaction. Her mother was simultaneously able to move forward, grow and evolve – in some ways maybe more so – because of their interactions.
Spirits are as unique and individual as people are in the physical. Some spirits are dedicated to this work and contacting those on earth. Others are marginally interested, but are busy doing other things on “the other side.” Still others don’t need to stay in contact and have other things to do. It's really up to them regarding how much they want to stay in touch. We pick up the phone and answer emails when we want to and don't when we don't want to. It will be much the same when we have spirit communication technology.
Q. Could SoulPhone devices be used in negative or harmful ways as has occurred with the Internet and other technologies in the world today?
There will always be those who use surgical knives to kill rather than cure. Some will use smart phones to trigger bombings instead of sending loving messages. Potential abuse of the SoulPhone is no different than for any other technology. Society must be educated in respecting the gift and power of this technology for humanity.
Q. Will using the SoulPhone and communicating with spirits possibly leave ones self open to evil interference?
We are very mindful of this possibility and have considered it for years. Here is not the place to describe how we address this profound question. There are technical ways to minimize abuse from “negative” spirits, but for reasons of intellectual property cannot be shared here.
Insights from the science of Quantum Electro-Dynamics (QED) indicate that you get what you intend. For people who believe in evil spirits, those are very real. On the other hand, for example, evidential mediums who do not believe in negative spirits can truthfully say they have never observed one. So both those who perceive evil spirits, and those who don’t, are telling their truth.
When using out-of-body (OBE) techniques, Robert Monroe of the Monroe Institute recommended intending that you will connect only with those on your energetic level or above. Another of his techniques involved encasing one's self in a protective shield. The SoulPhone technology may incorporate using one or more of these approaches to protect being “spiritually hacked.”
Addressing the “negative spirits” issue will take a multipronged approach:
education to alleviate ungrounded fears and false beliefs
realistic assessment of what real dangers there may be (we have already consulted evidential mediums and collaborating spirits about this)
practical awareness and alertness to these concerns, not unlike those we have on earth for people with "evil" intentions
What about slanderous attacks many years ago against Dr. Schwartz?
from Mark Pitstick, MA, DC - director of the SoulPhone Foundation
Recently, I received an email asking about old and unsubstantiated allegations against Dr. Gary Schwartz ten years ago. A former Yale and Harvard professor, Dr. Schwartz is now the lead scientist at the University of Arizona’s Laboratory for Advancements in Consciousness & Health directing the SoulPhone Technology Prototype Research Program. I asked him about these baseless attacks in a Q & A format.
Q: Dr. Schwartz, how many attacks have been leveled against your work?
A: On numerous occasions, I have experienced unfair, unjust, and even malicious reactions from certain people ever since I went public with my afterlife research in the HBO documentary Life After Life. I have recounted examples of this extremely unprofessional and irresponsible behavior in my books The Afterlife Experiments (2002), The Truth about Medium (2005), The Sacred Promise (2011), and An Atheist in Heaven (2016).
Q: Why do you think these unsubstantiated allegations occurred?
A: Many intelligent and reasonable people do not yet believe that survival of consciousness is true. Some of them are not interested in examining the scientific evidence addressing life-after-death, much less considering the bigger implications. Einstein put it this way, “The important thing is to not stop questioning.” We should always remain open to new data and new ideas.
Strong beliefs about a very emotional topic – in this instance, the possibility of an afterlife – can so cloud the judgment of others that they no longer remain open to solid evidence that can be confirmed or refuted. This is especially unfortunate when a media person takes this stance and discredits evidence from scientific research.
Q. I understand that, ten years ago, a journalist falsely reported an incident involving you?
A: As you know, Mark, sensationalism sells. As you say, the show reported unsubstantiated claims that were not true. It’s important to emphasize that I was never sued and there were no follow-ups on this story. My attorneys encouraged me to sue the show and persons making false accusations against me. I decided to take the high road and focus on my research and education instead of descending to their level.
Q: Where did these untrue accusations come from?
A: I revealed this information in Chapter 25 of An Atheist in Heaven, written in collaboration with Paul Davids, who produced the documentary The Life After Death Project.
In brief, I was accused of being a “fraud” in “overstepping” my position as a university researcher by “requesting over three million dollars from a bereaved father who had lost his son.” Does it make sense that a senior professor at a major university would attempt to charge a family 3.5 million dollars for his mediumship services, especially when the professor is not a medium and never claims he is?
I regularly explain that I do not “see” or “hear” spirits. In fact, one of my former colleagues, Dr. Robert Stek, affectionately called me the “Helen Keller of afterlife research.”
So where did that figure come from?
Here is the truth. A wealthy bereaved father read The Afterlife Experimentsbook. He then contacted one of the mediums featured in the book and had multiple private readings with her. He was so amazed by the accuracy of the readings that he called me to share his gratitude. He asked me what he might do to help advance the research and also give it credibility.
I told the father that, if he was really that wealthy, he might consider creating an endowed named professorship in afterlife science at a major university in honor of his deceased son. I suggested that he could do so in his son’s name.
The father asked me how much it would cost to fund such a distinguished professorship. I told him that at a private university like Harvard or Yale it could cost 3.5 million dollars. I told the father of the deceased son that he could gift this endowment to any university he chose – his son’s alma mater, or universities where afterlife research was ongoing such as the University of Virginia or the University of Arizona. That’s where the $3.5 million figure came from.
The back story, shared here for the first time, is that the father turned out to have a shady history. He had been in federal prison for certain offenses. Moreover, the father wanted me to go into business with him and create an international fee-for-service business with potentially thousands of mediums worldwide.
I told him I could not endorse such a for-profit plan. I could only endorse creating a non-profit organization that would help grieving parents become aware of the emerging afterlife research and connect with highly qualified certified mediums. This resulted in the birthing of the Forever Family Foundation; I proposed the foundation’s name and had the privilege to serve as its first president. www.foreverfamilyfoundation.org
The father was furious with me (as well as the families who created the foundation) for taking this course of action, and he attempted to get even. But he never sued me, nor were there ever any grounds for doing so.
Author’s note: if there are any questions about these old and baseless attacks on Dr. Schwartz , please contact Dr. Mark Pitstick mark@TheSoulPhoneFoundation.org