Hello Yongwon,

You asked about the speakers in the seance recordings. Nineteenth century vocabulary was not greatly different from twentieth century vocabulary. In fact, most of current English usage traces itself back to the Middle Ages. "Breakfast," for instance, means to break the fast of not eating overnight. We pronounce the words as the English did in the Middle Ages ("brek fust") even though we pronounce "break" as "brake" and "fast" as "fahst."

There are differences between vocabulary of Shakespeare's time in Elizabethan England (around 1600) and today, but that is because there were four centuries separating Shakespeare from us. Victoria's English was the same as our English.

Alexandra was British. She was the daughter of Christian IX of Denmark, but was queen consort of Edward VII of Great Britain. She founded the British Royal Army Nursing Corps.

But the greater issue is, if someone faked Victoria's and Alexandra's voices so perfectly, who did it? The medium was bound and gagged and the sitters were monitored. Others sitting in the room heard the voices coming from the air and there was no one there. No one heard a voice coming from anyone in the room. Dozens of researchers sat in on the seances and tightly controlled the circumstances and people there. Many were determined to prove Flint to be a fake. No one ever found anything to support the idea that any of the voices came from any natural source. Never. That's true of modern direct-voice mediums such as David Thompson as well.

And the range of voices from males to females to people with different intonations and idiosyncracies and different personalities would be impossible for any person to duplicate.

As far as the voice quality is concerned, parents of children who passed away attested to the fact that they had conversations with their children through the direct-voice mediums. People who knew the deceased in life attested that the speakers had all the voice qualities of the deceased. The only differences are differences in fine nuances and things like pitch because the person isn't speaking using a body and they were creating the voices from their own memories and wishes. Their bodies are deteriorating somewhere in the ground. They spoke using a voice box created on the spot, in the air, and it mimics their speech, but it undoubtedly has differences. But faking the voice wouldn't account for the differences; they're not the differences you would get from just faking the voice. They're just subtle differences from the voice box mechanism.

There's not a scrap of evidence that the voices were anything but spirits, and there are pages and pages of evidence from witnesses and researchers stating without question that the voices came out of the air, and statements by ALL of the parents or spouses of the deceased or people who knew the deceased are that the voices they had conversations with had the knowledge, personality, idiosyncracies, voice patterns, intimate affection, and most important, the love of the deceased.

What more evidence could we require?

Craig