[name withheld] W. Meek’s Spiricom: Recorded claims of two-way communication with the dead
This part of the broadcast is not a caller’s story. It is a recorded documentary narration, presented by Art Bell as the voice of [name withheld] W. Meek, about Meek’s EVP and Spiricom research from 1971 onward. The narration reports contacts with deceased communicators called “[name withheld],” Dr. [name withheld], and [name withheld]. It gives dates, a claimed death certificate, and a social security number, and audio excerpts are played on air. The segment ends partway through the feature, as the host returns to describe the Spiricom Mark IV device.
This clip comes from the source recording. AI chose where it starts and ends, so it may start or end a little early or late. The word-for-word transcript is not published. You can hear the source recording on the Internet Archive (file “Ghost to Ghost 2004.mp3”, starting at 24:40). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
This excerpt is a recorded narration, introduced by Art Bell as the voice of [name withheld] W. Meek, about Meek’s own EVP and instrumental-transcommunication research. The narrator says they became involved in EVP research in 1971. The narrator says an engineer and inventor with more than 80 patents was involved. By 1975, the narrator says, they had opened a small laboratory in Philadelphia and concluded they needed a more sophisticated apparatus. They also wanted the [quote withheld] The narrator says they met [name withheld], an electronic technician described as clairvoyant and clairaudient. Through [name withheld] they contacted a medical doctor who had been dead five years, called “[name withheld],” who had been a ham radio operator. [name withheld] is said to have suggested using certain audio frequencies instead of white noise. The narrator reports hearing [name withheld]’s first words on October 27, 1977, played as a barely understandable recording. The group is then said to have made contact with a scientist among the dead who identified themself as Dr. [name withheld]. The narrator says they checked their claimed 1967 death certificate, their social security number, and details of their studies at the University of Wisconsin and Cornell. The narrator says this led to a second breakthrough dated September 22, 1980. The narrator then introduces [name withheld], who is said to have died in 1830 in rural Virginia. The narrator notes that birth records have not confirmed their existence. Audio of two-way conversations follows, mostly marked low-confidence in the automatic transcript. The excerpt ends with a description of the Spiricom Mark IV device before the host returns to the microphone.
Reported events, in order
- 0:00
The narration begins partway through the feature. EVP tapes made in 1977 by [name withheld], a hearing aid specialist in England, are introduced, and a short excerpt is played.
- 0:46
The narrator says they became involved in EVP research in 1971. By 1975 a small laboratory was opened in Philadelphia, and a more sophisticated apparatus was judged necessary.
- 1:29
The narrator says the team wanted the active collaboration of someone who had died. Through [name withheld], an electronic technician described as clairvoyant and clairaudient, they contacted a doctor who had been dead five years, called “[name withheld].”
- 1:57
[name withheld] is said to have suggested using certain audio frequencies instead of white noise as an energy source for their voice.
- 2:53
The narrator reports hearing [name withheld]’s first words through the tone mixture on October 27, 1977, and a short exchange is played.
- 7:32
The narrator says contact was made with a scientist among the dead who identified themself as Dr. [name withheld]. The narrator says they checked their claimed 1967 death certificate, their social security number, and details of their studies at the University of Wisconsin and Cornell.
- 8:50
A second major breakthrough is dated September 22, 1980. A garbled exchange follows, including a repeated [quote withheld]
- 10:57
The narrator introduces [name withheld], said to have lived in rural Virginia and died in 1830, and notes that birth records have not confirmed their existence.
- 11:39
More two-way audio excerpts are played, including counting exercises and a conversation about someone’s age and marriage, mostly marked low-confidence.
- 15:11
The narrator describes the Spiricom Mark IV device. The host returns to say that what listeners heard is real and that documentation is linked on the show’s website.
Claims
Each claim is labeled as something the person telling the story noticed (observation), what they made of it (interpretation), something others told them (hearsay), or something the host said (host statement).
- observation· 0:07
The narrator says EVP tapes made in 1977 by a hearing aid specialist in England contain voices, including German words repeated three times.
- interpretation· 1:29
The narrator says [name withheld] could see and hear people in other dimensions.
- observation· 1:42
The narrator reports contacting a deceased doctor, called [name withheld], who had been a ham radio operator.
- observation· 2:53
The narrator reports hearing [name withheld]’s first words through a loud mixture of provided tones on October 27, 1977.
- observation· 7:59
A communicator who identified themself as Dr. [name withheld] is said to have supplied a death certificate year, a social security number, and details of their life.
- interpretation· 10:38
The narrator concludes that meaningful instrumental communication had been established with a deceased person.
- observation· 11:03
A communicator who identified themself as [name withheld] is said to have died in 1830. The narrator says the record check has not confirmed their existence.
- host statement· 15:40
The host says the audio played is real.
- host statement· 16:03
The host says the broadcast contains ongoing two-way communication with the dead.
Scores, with reasons
An AI model gave these scores using a fixed set of scoring rules (scoring-v1). They are editorial judgments and rough guides, not the odds that anything paranormal happened. How scoring works.
The narration is specific about dates, places, names, and a checking procedure, and the order of events is mostly coherent. But it is decades-old material relayed without live questioning, the key audio is described as barely understandable, and no ordinary explanations are addressed.
Evidence for and against
- Concrete dates, places, and named people throughout.
- The narrator describes a deliberate step to check one communicator’s identity.
- In places, the narration separates what was heard from what was concluded.
- A relayed documentary narration, not a live firsthand speaker.
- No other explanation for voices drawn from noise is considered.
- The narrator jumps to a strong conclusion about communication with the dead.
- One claimed record check is said to have failed and is explained away.
- The labels showing who is speaking are automatic, and the narration voice may be misattributed.
- Large parts of the played audio are untranscribed or low-confidence.
- The excerpt is a fragment of a longer feature.
- 0:46
- 2:53
- 8:50
- 10:38
What the model inferred (not said on air): Sum of parts: closeness to events 10 (relayed archival documentary narration, no live questioning), specific detail 16, consistency 13, other explanations 5, calibration 4, for a total of 48. I applied the cap for relayed or secondhand material (60 or less).
Documents are claimed to exist (a 1967 death certificate, a social security number, a publication with a photograph, schematics on a website), and audio is actually played. But nothing was examined on air, and one claimed check ([name withheld]’s birth records) is said to have failed.
Evidence for and against
- Specific items that could be checked are named: a death certificate year, a social security number, universities, a publication.
- Recorded audio excerpts are played during the segment.
- The host says documentation is available through a website link.
- No document, photograph, or recording is described as inspected by the host.
- The narration’s own record check for [name withheld] is described as unconfirmed.
- The played audio is described as very hard to understand.
- The host did not examine any document, photograph, death certificate, or recording on air.
- No outside check was performed.
- Who is speaking, and the transcription of the audio excerpts, are unreliable.
- 7:59
- 8:21
- 11:11
What the model inferred (not said on air): I placed this in the 26 to 40 band because documents are claimed to exist and are pointed to, but none was examined in the excerpt. The hard cap of 50 applies because no outside check was performed.
The material is technical and earnest rather than frightening. There is no threat, no intrusion into a home or bedroom, and no physical contact, and the mood is excitement at a research result.
Evidence for and against
- Voices attributed to deceased people are played.
- The narrator refers to [name withheld] being “a bit scared” at first contact.
- No harm, threat, or hostile presence is reported.
- The narrator presents it as a celebration of research progress.
- Listener reaction to the garbled audio cannot be judged from text.
- The excerpt is cut off before any further material.
- 1:42
- 2:53
What the model inferred (not said on air): My rating reflects the absence of threat or intrusion in the reported events. The slight eeriness comes from the idea of the voices of the dead on tape.
EVP is a familiar motif in the archive. But a named two-way device, a claimed check of a communicator’s death certificate and social security number, and named communicators give the story a distinctive frame beyond stock elements.
Evidence for and against
- A specific named and dated device.
- Named communicators with claimed document checks.
- Instrumental transcommunication and EVP are recurring motifs in this archive.
- The substance of the recorded exchanges is unintelligible in the transcript.
- Novelty compared with the rest of the archive is provisional while few stories are archived.
- The audio exchanges are too garbled to judge how distinctive their content is.
- 1:57
- 15:27
What the model inferred (not said on air): I judged this from the content only. The published originality score will be recalculated by comparing it with the rest of the archive.
Scoring confidence 0.50 · analysis confidence 0.55 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: A recorded narration (archival documentary audio); Audio excerpts played on air, described as very hard to understand and mostly transcribed with low confidence; Documents mentioned but not examined: a 1967 death certificate, a social security number, the publication “Spiricom,” and schematics on a website. The originality score blends the model's score (58) with how rare the story's details are across the archive. This method is still provisional.
Ordinary explanations to consider
These are possibilities only. None is a finding about what happened.
- Listeners and researchers sorting through random noise may have heard speech-like patterns in the recordings of tones and noise. · [quote withheld] [quote withheld]
- The recordings could contain radio interference or mixed-together transmissions picked up by the equipment. · [quote withheld] The method is described as supplying audio frequencies as an energy source.
- The content attributed to the communicators may have been supplied or shaped by the claimed clairvoyant go-between rather than by the equipment alone. · [quote withheld] [quote withheld]
What stands out
This is not a personal ghost story. It is a decades-old research narrative about instrumental transcommunication. The “witnesses” are a research team, and the evidence is claimed paperwork (a death certificate and social security number said to have been supplied by the communicator) rather than anything seen in a room.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.