E-mail from Professor Peter Wadhams to Michael Roll (August 5, 2002): Sir William Crookes was Poisoned by Thallium!

In his e-mail, Professor Wadhams writes:
"(...) it is necessary to demonstrate that Crookes was out of his mind because experimental evidence that does not agree with the standard settled world view has to be discredited in some way (...)"
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to Professor Peter Wadhams (August 4, 2002): Sir William Crookes

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"I am familiar with the usual outrageous accusations aimed at Sir William Crookes, that he was a liar, a cheat, a crank, a fraud and that he was having sex with the medium that he worked with. However, in last months issue of The Paranormal Review (July 2002) Professor Bernard Carr reports that the obscurants have also floated the idea that Sir William must have been poisoned by the chemical element that he discovered - thallium!"
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to Victor Zammit (August 26, 2002): Professional Wreckers

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"The time has come for people to realise that it's a scientific fact that we all survive the death of our physical bodies and it's nothing to do with believing in priestcraft."
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to Victor Zammit (August 25, 2002): Professional Wreckers

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"[Dr John] Beloff is the perfect ally for James Randi and all the rest of the professional wreckers who are fighting with all their might to block the secular scientific case for survival from reaching the public."
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to John Samson (September 16, 2002): Society for Psychical Research

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"This crushing proof of survival after death was not only censored by those who control what sees the light of day within the one-god religion of Spiritualism. It has also been censored by the thought police who have infiltrated the Society for Psychical Research ever since I first submitted these reports in 1983."
Read More...

An Open Letter to the Bath-based Scientist Ronald Pearson (June 27, 2002): Professor David Fontana

In his letter, Michael Roll writes:
"(...) the former President of the Society for Psychical Research, the psychologist Prof. David Fontana, is lecturing to students linking life after death with subatomic physics (...)"
Read More...

Letter from Michael Roll to Professor Peter Wadhams (May 24, 2002): An Experiment Proving Survival After Death

In his letter, Michael Roll writes:
"Only repeatable experiments with a materialisation medium can give the crushing proof that we all survive the death of our physical bodies.

(...)

Our ancestors witnessed the same phenomena and jumped to the wrong conclusions. Hence all the dangerous and divisive religions that are tearing the world apart. All the religious killing with stop immediately people find out they are fighting over nothing whatsoever apart from ancient people misunderstanding natural forces in nature."
Read More...

Letter from Michael Roll to The Royal Society (April 26, 2002): Philosophical Balance

In his letter, Michael Roll writes:
"I see that Professor Bernard Carr, the President of the SPR, has been booked to speak at The Royal Society on 9th May. May those of us who have started from the base that Sir William Crookes and Sir Oliver Lodge were correct in their conclusions be permitted to balance the thoughts of Prof. Carr and the hierarchy of the SPR?"
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to Victor Zammit (July 2, 2001): The Scientific Proof of Survival After Death

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"Uncomfortable discoveries in physics that prove we all survive the death of our physical bodies are being deliberately blocked from even coming to the attention of people in Great Britain for them to accept or reject as the case may be. This is solely to keep the old-boy network ticking over nicely."
Read More...

E-mail from Michael Roll to Gary Schwartz (May 1, 2003): The Scientific Proof of Survival After Death Belongs to Every Person on Earth

In his e-mail, Michael Roll writes:
"This begs the question, why has Prof. Archie Roy kept quiet about the revolutionary mediumship of Rita Goold that he witnessed in 1983?"
Read More...

Letter from Michael Roll to Ray Taylor (June 4, 2001): A Balance in SPR Publications

This letter was published unedited.

In his letter, Michael Roll writes:
"The criticism of the SPR will only cease when this balance is achieved. The secular scientific approach to survival after death is to be found on my web site www.scsad.afterlifeinstitute.org."
Read More...

Letter from Prof. Bernard Carr to Psychic News (March 17, 2001): SPR President Responds

This letter was published in Psychic News, issue 3587.

In his letter, Professor Bernard Carr writes:
"I am not personally antagonistic towards survival research. While I remain agnostic on the reality (or at least nature) of survival, there is no doubt that this has always been an important part of the SPR's research activities and I hope it will remain so. On the other hand, it is no longer the only (or even main) thrust of our research programme."
Read More...

Ronald Pearson's Response to Bernard Carr's Letter of March 17, 2001 (March 31, 2001): Is The SPR Serious About Being Even Handed?

This letter was published in Psychic News, March 31, 2001

In his letter, Ronald Pearson writes:
"Theorists are searching for a 'Theory of Everything' and yet deliberately ignore the major factor: that psi phenomena suggest that something else must exist behind the universe of matter."

"The SPR refused my paper on grounds that it needed to first appear in a scientific journal because the expertise needed for its assessment did not exist within the SPR. This condition is now satisfied (...). Is the SPR now prepared to prove its claim of having no corporate policy by publication of this approach?"
Read More...

Open Letter from John Samson (January 9, 2001): Survivalists in the SPR

This letter was written after Professor Bernard Carr was made President of the SPR.

Professor Bernard Carr and his committee rejected Ronald Pearson's paper that he had prepared for the 23rd International Conference of the SPR held at the University of Durham in September 1999. He also censored Michael Roll's paper that told the story of how mothers had been physically reunited with their "dead" children over and over again.
Professor Carr justified this decision with the following words:
"Your topic is not really appropriate for the conference audience.”


In his letter, John Samson writes:
"when one links this statement with the vociferous attempts by those at the heart of the SPR who wished to suppress the Scole Report and regarded it as 'an embarrassment to the Society', then we are confronted by a most regrettable situation indeed.”
Read More...