The Cost of Not Diversifying Your Afterlife Investigation
How to avoid missing crucial connections and profound insights when examining afterlife evidence.
After my first 15 years investigating life after death, I wrote a book of my findings and subsequent conclusions. It felt like writing a final report following a lengthy investigation. In that book, Answers About the Afterlife: A Private Investigator’s 15-Year Research Unlocks the Mysteries of Life after Death, I discovered that no single category of afterlife evidence was nearly as persuasive as viewing all the evidence as a whole.
Let me repeat that for emphasis: No single category of afterlife evidence was nearly as persuasive as viewing all the evidence as a whole.
Early in the writing of that book, while answering questions and using specific evidence to back up my claims, I wondered if I would write about different forms of evidence later in the book that contradicts what the early-book evidence suggested. There was no contradiction. Instead, there was agreement, even between very different forms of evidence like past-life regressions and spirit communication with mediums, OR out-of-body experiences and between-life regressions.
The Web of Parallels
I refer to this revelation as the “Web of Parallels,” which came to me when I completed the writing of that book and discovered that all the evidence discussed in my 70,000-word manuscript was in complete agreement with one another.