I continue to be on my two-week countdown, as per my previous entry. In the meantime, periodically I have the whim to reflect back what "you all" are doing with regard to this website, via the site's stats. I'm seeing a fascinating trend, which I've remarked on, before--increasing vacillation in the stat for unique daily visits.
Years ago, I saw an interesting physics demonstration at George Tech Univ. The professor giving the lecture played a video of his experiment, and the experiment was intended to show that he could take down a tall metal light pole with a ball-peen hammer. It's the same principle, he said, which threatens to destroy a suspension bridge, if foot soldiers walking across it don't break step. In the video, he takes a watch in one hand, this little hammer in the other, and commences hitting the pole at carefully-timed intervals. A certain rhythm of vibration is set up, building upon itself, until sure enough, the pole is swaying--at first, almost imperceptibly, then in an increasing arc, until the thing is rocking violently back and forth far above his head! He said that had he not discontinued the experiment, he could have brought it down.
I could be wrong, but this is something akin to what I'm seeing in my stats. You see, I have to be nuts. That's the only explanation. I must be self-deluded...and yet...
So there is a sort of "morbid curiosity" rhythm which starts to vibrate back, and forth. People visit, feel repelled and attracted at the same time--because on a deep level, they know it's true, but everything they've been taught says it can't be--and they go away. Then they come back--and they go away...
Perhaps there is something else which accounts for this pattern, but I can definitely tell you, it wasn't always like this. In years past, there was a steady 250 visits per day. You could almost set your clock by it, so-to-speak. It was all very predictable. This website was on the top of the second page in Google, higher on Yahoo (as I recall), and there were 250 unique visits. Sometimes 252, or 248.
Always, at the top, were the announcements page, the links page, the personal accounts page, and a few others as one might expect. My own Updates page was far down on the list, and when I wrote my article about my method for investigating reincarnation cases, that, too, never got very high. Of course, it all depends on who is linking to you.
Lately, I'm seeing a new pattern, and I'll capture the graphics so you can see it for yourself. The first is a graph of unique visits (yellow) for this month of June, 2016. The second is taken from the chart showing the number of hits on each of the top 30 pages.
Here, my article--the one describing the method my book was based on--is at the top. This is highly unusual, and suggests a rather large website must be linking to it (and bless them!). The article on my Guru, Meher Baba, has been near the top every month for years, now, but is probably read mostly by current followers. My page on Jeff Keene, whose famous reincarnation case I was the first to present in 1998, is always near the top, as well. Abby opted to discontinue her journal, which ran for some three or four years, with hundreds of entries. Recently, however, she commented on the U.S. Presidential election, and that, apparently, has become noteworthy in itself. Then comes this page, which surprises me. A couple of years ago, I think it was, I stopped writing a blog with commentary about general topics. Now, this functions primarily in its original capacity, as an "Update" to my current projects. Still, for some reason, it is in the #8 position this month. But of 191 people who have read it, only 101, or just a little over half, have seen fit to look at my book's supporting page; and almost no-one looks at the actual product on my online store. Of those that do, perhaps one or two per year actually purchase it. The same goes for Abby's book.
Now, I don't use hype. I remember (because I have 100% emotional memory from my past-life in the 19th century), how Mathew Franklin Whittier felt about slick advertising. Actually, I have quite a few of his parodies on the subject, so I don't have to rely just on my emotional reactions. I still feel the same way. I wonder, though, how many people, landing on the book's supporting page, realize what's wrong with it? Something just doesn't grab them--something just isn't exciting about it, or is downright boring. The type is too small--there are no splashes, or superlatives, or eye-grabbing graphics of any kind. There is only a deeply-disturbing comparison image, of the present-life portrait and past-life portrait, and a lot of text. Significant, intellectually-honest text.
There's something else that's new--my old archived radio interviews, and my self-shot video interview (being interviewed by a friend), are getting more plays. One of the radio interviews has been listened to 27 times, and the video interview has been watched 24 times. This may not seem like much, but it's unheard of on this website. The video interview, in case you want to watch it, is at the top of the "Interviews" page; and the archived radio interviews are accessible via an icon and link down a-ways on the home page. Notice I am not making a fancy graphic and a link here, giving you a "call to action." You can find it if you are motivated enough.
Everything in that video, by the way, is the truth. Some of the historical facts are a bit off, or incomplete, because I made new discoveries since giving the interview. For those who have seen it, I forgot to mention that there were many other "hits" in the first psychic reading I had--I didn't accept it solely because of the initial hit. It turns out I didn't recognize the Whittier farm because they had spruced it up--when I found pictures of it before the renovation (not restoration), the sense of recognition was stronger. Not that that was evidential, of course, because I knew what I was looking at. I also neglected to mention that not only did Mathew and George Bradburn work in the same building, but they worked for many of those 14 years in the same department, i.e., the Naval Department. I also didn't realize that small sewing baskets typically do have that design--but picnic baskets made in that design appear to be exceedingly rare. I was finally able to buy one, which looks to be maybe 100 years old (early 20th century), given the machine sewing of the leather plate and silverware holders on the inside lid. But clearly, it was meant to be a picnic basket. My hunch is, that Mathew and Abby were given a large sewing basket to use as a picnic basket in 1832. I also didn't know, at that time, that I would find similar stories--though not exactly the same story--embedded in Mathew's humorous sketches. One has them laughing together for no particular reason; another has him stepping on a toad and falling in the mud, when he was about to propose, with her unable to keep from laughing. If the exact details of the memory were included in one of his stories, I never found that one. Typically, though, he would "mix-and-match."*
As regards not feeling any familiarity with his middle name, "Franklin," I determined that he probably was known that way within his immediately family (mostly, perhaps, when referred to third-person, rather than when being addressed directly) and in his hometown (because the townsfolk couldn't understand the difference); that he didn't mind it inasmuch as it related to his namesake, Benjamin Franklin, but he disliked its required use due to superstition or formality (as he disliked all superstition and formality). Outside his hometown, with his wife and his friends, he appears to have used either "Matt" or "Mathew." He did, however, draw upon variations of "Franklin" as an alternative pseudonym. There are no verified instances of his using "Frank" except possibly once as a pseudonym (when, writing from Philadelphia, he probably didn't want to get it confused with Benjamin), although it became the delight of myth-spinning historians to insist that he did.
My response to the question as to why I wrote my book, was flip. Perhaps, it was typical of what Mathew would have said; but my real reasons go much deeper. I wish I could re-shoot this part of the interview. There are several personal reasons, including restoring my past-life legacy; and there are several altruistic reasons, as well. When people understand the universality of this work, it will be doing its job on this second level.
As for Abby, in the six years we've been married across the Great Divide, she has given me even stronger evidence of her existence than what I describe in the latter half of the video. Our purpose is not to prove that to you--but in being honest about it, I end up providing yet another challenge for you, regarding my credibility. I will tell you this much--this kind of continuing marriage with a soul-mate is something that has been known and documented at least since 1848, and in modern times, as well. Gifford Pinchot, the 28th governor of Pennsylvania, who was also a leader in the Conservation movement, kept up such a relationship for many years after his fiance's death. I have come to know of several other couples who are also doing this, now. At least two well-respected paranormal researchers reported that they did this after their respective spouses passed. It simply doesn't get much press, for obvious reasons. More commonly reported, these days, is mothers keeping in contact (and hence, in relationship) with their late sons or daughters. (Perhaps that seems less kinky, or less subject to fond romantic imagination--or perhaps it is simply more readily indulged, for pity's sake, even if it isn't truly believed.) Incidentally, I found evidence that Mathew was doing this with Abby, also, about 10 years after her passing, in 1851, but like Pinchot, couldn't sustain it. Pinchot lasted some 15 years before remarrying--Mathew appears to have attempted it for at least a couple of years. I am past the six-year mark with Abby in this life, and will be going the distance.
In all of this, I won't water anything down for you, nor will I hype anything up for you. I write well, and the material is fascinating, but it is not dumbed-down for anybody. If you can't pass the test of reading the summary page, you are not going to be able to read the book. And, I don't care what's en vogue. I don't care whether e-books are "in" or "out"; I don't care whether reincarnation is officially accepted or ridiculed. I don't care whether you define science as materialistic, or not. I don't care whether you are afraid of a long book, or not. All I care about is that I told the truth, and did it well. Exceptionally, exceedingly well, in my opinion (given that Abby is really the co-author and helped me find the greatest portion of the evidence). I'll make this concession--I'll explain the title. Everybody, when they can't think of a better title for a work about a historical figure, falls back on "in his own words." But I am the reincarnation of Mathew Franklin Whittier. Not only is my past-life writing in this book, but my present-life commentary, as well. All of it is "in his own words," i.e., in my own words. I wonder, sometimes, how many people have gotten it. I suppose if I had done a focus group, and nobody in the group understood the pun...but I would have left it that way, because I like it, and moreover, I would have liked it when I was Mathew.
I also don't care whether I exceed anyone's "boggle threshold." I think the time for pussy-footing around people's boggle threshold is over. The time for fictionalized accounts is over, as well. None of this ever did any good, i.e., pandering to Society's ignorance. Here is the truth. You can take it if you dare, or you can leave it.
But what actually appears to be happening, is that people are vacillating. I see, for example, on the first of this month, 332 unique visits (once in awhile, my own visits may add some to the count). Then on the 4th it goes down to 223; but shoots up immediately to 308 two days later. Then back down to 221 on the 9th; and back to 375 on the 11th. In the mid-range for a few days, then up even higher to 426 on the 16th; but then, it plunges to 170 on the 19th. Back to 310 two days later, on the 21st; down to 211 on the 23rd. Up to 343 on the 25th; then crashing down to 196 the following day. From whence it has still not recovered, as of the 28th.**
Keep in mind this is not normal for this website; or if we don't know what "normal" is, it is not typical. It almost never went over 300--when it did, I could usually tie it to some national broadcast of a special about reincarnation. What would make it vacillate like this every few days, when it used to be a steady 250, for years on end?
I think the pole is swaying quite perceptibly, now...
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
*Several other elements in the proposal story match a memory I received directly from Abby about Mathew declaring his love for her by moonlight on the banks of the nearby Merrimack River, on May Day. I found this story well after receiving the memory. Looking it up, I found that there was a full moon on May 1, 1836, when this would have taken place. The story, meanwhile, references a "harvest moon" and also mentions the aurora borealis. There is a historical record of an especially bright aurora being visible about a week from that date. The aurora is visible from Haverhill, Mass. I did not get any sense of the aurora in the memory-glimpse, nor of any comical mishaps occurring at that time.
**Up again on the 30th and 31st.
Music opening this page: "Nerve Up" by Billy Goodrum, from the album, "Weightless"