Skip to content


  1. John H.
    2015-04-03 @ 12:48 AM

    To be brief, I am reading the book now (The Last Frontier), and I like it a lot, especially the particular approach to the subject; however, like so many other books in this area, an underlying problem that I see over and over–to put it simply–is that too much power is given to scientists. What do I mean by that? I mean why is (their) approval required or needed at all in order for the afterlife or anything paranormal to be validated? This is a similar situation I see in studying/researching alternative healing, e.g., herbal, reiki, aromatherapy, etc., online, or anything else for that matter that might possibly encroach (?) on scientific turf. For example, one always runs into, “be sure to check with your physician before using or attempting whatever!” Basically, what I’m trying to say here is that somehow, somewhere along to the line, an outright and tremendous fear has been instilled into humanity to not think for ourselves, or to do anything at all ourselves, without the expressed stamped approval of a scientist!?–why is this the consensus? Guess what, nine times our to ten, you ask your physician something a little out of the norm, whether it be the safety of a particular herb, supplement, or even what happens after we die, and they have no opinion–or mumble something. I call that the silent disclaimer that they likely don’t know–at least this has been my experience. Don’t get me wrong, if you are about to put something into your body that is questionable I would be the first to implore you to do your research and ask all the questions you can from as many reliable sources you could find–including your doctor. The major point here is though, why are we all giving “scientists” so much power to control our general realities. This is essentially exactly what we continue to do and it needs to stop. It’s time for a new authority–ourselves (?) Physicists, from what I’ve heard, put on their pants the same way I do, and sometimes they might even have trouble finding their car keys. They will likely be denying the afterlife, or anything similar, for a very long time to come, and there will always be skeptics.

    • Julia
      2015-04-03 @ 12:54 PM

      Bravo John! I thought you questions were so provocative I made a small post out of it. I have spent this whole year teaching people how to access their inner senses, and more important, how to rely on the information they deliver. And it is amazing what we know and can know using our inner senses. It is what we learn from our own innate bank of knowledge that should shape science, not the other way around.

  2. Terente
    2016-02-02 @ 5:30 PM

    Hi, Julia and you all!
    First of all, excuse my poor english, I’m just a Romanian beginner.
    But let’s start to write some ideas of mine. There are so many doubts concerning NDEs. That’s because it’s about faith stuff and not about facts scientifically verifiable. There isn’t hard OR soft science, but science AND pseudoscience. From the science point of view, NDEs are clear and explained…
    As I previously said, pseudoscience call, preponderantly, the faith. So, we rich in this way, the realm of incertitude, subjectivism, imagination and so on…

    On the other hand, the today’s science of medicine don’t have and I think will never have, the capability nor the instruments to explain if there is life after death.
    Without trying to ridicule the NDE phenomenon, it’s a long way to bring unwavering proof about life after death. From my point of vue, I don’t care if there is or not life after death; anyway “I” is unique, never replicable, whether “I” dies permanently or just apparently. But I indulgently understand the willingness of the others to believe that there is something after death. 😉

    Have a nice day and a brilliant life!

    • Julia
      2016-02-04 @ 12:09 PM

      Dear Terente, I agree that NDEs don’t prove anything about the continuance of consciousness. I go through all of the so-called proof and evidence in my book, The Last Frontier, using the criteria set out for proof. There are four chapters on this alone and almost nothing constitutes proof! Thanks for the links too!

      Have a brilliant life yourself!


  3. Terente
    2016-02-02 @ 5:44 PM

    I found it, it was right under my nose, viz. under the title of this one! Sorry for double and third posting.
    Please move, if possible, my post to thread with 94 comments. Thanks!

  4. S
    2017-03-28 @ 7:25 AM

    It’s so simple. The scientific method cannot say anything about life after death because it is limited in its ability to see beyond its take on existence. Certain types of non-physical phenomenon cannot be observed with technology and experiments.

    People become very arrogant. They want an easy way out, so they assert what they think is the answer. This never proves anything. As I said before, it’s mostly only physical phenomenon that can be observed using physical tools.

    This is why more people need to attempt meditation without drugs. Just like NDEs, drugs don’t prove or disprove anything to do with living after you die. Okay, so you experienced some light, or maybe you experienced what felt like sleeping. That means nothing. Scientists themselves have said it – the brain becomes very active when oxygen is being cut off. This speaks only of a physical reason for seeing things (not including possible non-physical influences on the event).

    Lots of people take it that seeing nothing during an NDE proves there is no afterlife. These people aren’t thinking beyond a short experience where they weren’t truly dead. On the other hand, there are people who say that this state of “rest” is meant to be a time for contemplation before moving on.

    I’ll post more later, but I hope this gives people a reason to ponder.


    • Julia
      2017-04-07 @ 3:58 PM

      The questions remains–why should science prove what anthropologists refer to as a “Universal,” a concept or practice that has existed in every known culture. Although science cannot prove it, I doubt many scientists, no matter how Neo-Darwin they are, would deny that love exists.

  5. John Steinmeyer
    2017-06-28 @ 1:39 PM

    Julia, you said the following:For organized consciousness, there is a device that is quietly used in Germany for medical treatment. It has already inadvertently picked up the presence of the disembodied. I’m investigating it now and will tell you more as we go along.
    Have you learned any more about it and how can I learn what you have learned? Since I am 87 years ole it is of primary interest to me. Thanks……….and I own and have read several times your book

    • Julia
      2017-08-02 @ 8:44 AM

      Dear John, I’m sorry to say I have not made any progress in this direction. I have been overwhelmed with the process of settling into a new country, with peculiar variations of German hard to understand. And I am overloaded with work. I really do want to get back to writing and research but it will take sometime yet. All I can say is that as soon as I saw a dead person in the room, we immediately turned on the device and it registered very loudly a presence. What is wonderful about this is, that if the device is used on people clothed it doesn’t register much. So this presence was much stronger than a clothed person. You can also feel it physically. I train my students to feel it and they do, every time. Rest assured–WE DO SURVIVE!

Leave a Reply