Drop-in communicator database

If humans survive bodily death as some postulate is it possible to prove, by way of communication?
Many mediums and spiritualists insist they contact the departed and transmit messages to their
living relatives and friends. There have been many attempts to establish a `code' whereby a person,
after death, might let the living know they have survived. The following method could be adopted
by researchers.

A society or group will maintain a database of people who have given permission for their details to
be recorded (to be used after their death). In addition, people may also put forward details of
relatives who are already deceased.

The details will simply consist of a first name and / or nickname, address, date, month or year of
birth, nationality, occupation and a personal `catchphrase'. These could be split into up to a dozen
`bits', for example, a subject could be:

Arthur, `Tippy', 25 Walsh Road, Liverpool, Irish, 20th December, 1940, bus driver.

If Arthur (or `Tippy') survives death he could become a `drop-in-communicator' with as many
mediums in as many countries as possible. He would give only TWO pieces of information to each
medium;

1. His name and/or nickname (given to ALL mediums)

2. One other detail (unique to each medium).

Every medium in every country would be made aware of the possibility of a drop-in-communicator
giving them two pieces of information. If they receive anything that could be applicable they would
forward the details to the central database. The database keeper would cross-reference the details to
those on the database. Possible outcome:

Features of this method are simple. There are no convoluted messages, technical script or long
codes. It is also comprehensive, encouraging `drop-ins' to use unknown mediums all over the world
unlikely to have known of them in life. It is ongoing - it can be continued for as long as needed. It is
also evidential - only deliberate fraud could account for significant `hits'. The method is also
inexpensive; apart from the database & publicity there is no need for equipment, full-time
researchers or premises.

Perhaps the database should be limited to those who have specifically indicated that they are willing
to take part in the experiment. This would be to prevent the database growing too large (eventually
the shear volume of details would apply to a deceased person somewhere in the world by pure
chance).

Lastly, there is a concern that first name are too common. Nicknames may be better - but why not
full names (first names and surname)?

Copyright © 2004 by Michael Davies