October 2021

Dear SoulPhone family,

I hope you continue to positively transform after learning the scientific and clinical evidence that life continues after bodily death.

That data is discussed in the book Greater Reality Living by Dr. Gary Schwartz and myself.  It’s also listed in article #1 at SoulProof.com: Scientific Evidence That Bodily Death is NOT the End of Life and article #60 Clinical Evidence That Life Continues After Physical Death.

The SoulPhone Project has proceeded nicely over the last month in terms of software development, electrical engineer design and development, and some funding.  However, continued progress in all these area is required for a breakthrough SoulSwitch.  That provides 99.9% accurate Yes / No answers from postmaterial persons in less than 10 seconds.  That nearly real-time device could be used to develop the SoulKeyboard.

Expenses for those services wiped out the foundation balance but they were essential.  Thank you for continuing to donate and making a larger donation if you can.  (Those may be tax deductible for you since the foundation is a 501c3 nonprofit.  Most importantly, you are contributing to a historic project with the potential to help many people and our planet.)

Here are short answers to three of the most commonly asked questions about the SoulPhone Project:

1. What scientific research has been done?
Dr. Schwartz’s work has been described in three peer-reviewed scientific journal articles from 2010 to 2021.  A fourth paper is pending approval.  In addition, he edited with Marjorie Woolacott PhD the book Is Consciousness Primary? Perspectives from Founding Members of the Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Sciences. (2019)

To see research updates and references to journal articles , visit SoulPhone Project Updates at SoulPhone.com.

2. What makes this “real” scientific research?  
The following criteria are required to be considered actual scientific research: performed by highly trained scientist(s), conducted at a university or institute laboratory, strict controls, results replicated at other labs, experiments controlled for experimenter bias and unconscious psi effects, blinded conditions, randomized order, and statistical significance.  Results of the experiments must be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

3.  I’ve seen claims of ITC research online.  How is that different from the SoulPhone?  
No ITC (Instrumental Transcommunication) research has been done using the above conditions.  We will share our review of ‘SoulPhone Project and Instrumental Transcommunication Comparisons’ in our upcoming book The Case for the SoulPhone.  This is another infrastructure book needed before official announcements of scientific evidence for life after death and demos of the SoulSwitch device.

4. I’ve followed the SoulPhone Project for 4 years.  I notice you’ve moved from saying ‘This might / could / is anticipated to / should / is envisioned’ to ‘this will work.’  Why the change?
Responsible researchers use accurate modifiers when making claims.  It’s important to not overstate what the data support.  Dr. Schwartz likes to quote professor Neal E. Miller, PhD who said:  Be bold in what you try, cautious in what you claim.

As you astutely noticed, we’ve stated an increased degree of certainty over the last year.  We can accurately and responsibly do that now based on seven ‘proof-of-concept’ experiments conducted.  Research using the ‘true science’ criteria listed above allow us to make more robust claims about the eventual likelihood of ‘proof-of-practice’ devices.

Again, many thanks to you who have donated to the SoulPhone Project.  To see the many gifts for levels of funding, visit Membership and Donations.

Stay tuned!

P.S. You may enjoy enjoy reading this clinical evidence article #96 Shared Crossings.