is Reincarnations theory true ??

@Pearlylustre,

Quote:

I looked up enough about Stevenson to know that his theory is nonsense and I gave you two reasons why I think that. You haven't given any reasons why you think it is true other than to refer back to the book. You chose instead to act all hurt and offended. It's not that your views are different to mine it's that Stevenson's theory is ridiculous. I would also say that you looked like an idiot if you said you believed in alien abductions, talking to dead people or fairies at the bottom of the garden.

It is always the same isn't it!?
You haven't read the book yourself and you think it is enough to read secondary sources????????
So, we can state you actually haven't done any real research? Right?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

When you can see from the basic premise that something is nonsense then it would be ridiculous to spend time researching it.

1 Reply

@ibouvousaime,

Could be, but I don't know how it could ever be proven to be true.

People recounting supposed details about prior lives is no proof.

I might be inclined to wonder more if someone came to be and said they were the reincarnation of someone I knew intimately and recounted details that would be very difficult for a stranger to know. However, difficult doesn't mean impossible.

And even the memories of conversations or events shared only by me and the person said to have been reincarnated are not 100% accurate and are subject to being manipulated.

In any case the whole concept of reincarnation isn't about recalling past deeds and seeking out former loved ones. Those are usually saved for bunko scams.

0 Replies

@Pearlylustre,

Quote:

When you can see from the basic premise that something is nonsense then it would be ridiculous to spend time researching it.

We call it here "biased" and 'prejudiced" Wink

You start from an assumption, but of course as long as you haven't researched anything the question remains is yor primise flawed or not.
By seeing al the research it is pretty easy to see your premise is extremely flawed!

"we don't do research into this , because it is wrong from the start!
How do you know that if you haven't researched it?"
"I feel it in my guts".

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhtttttt!

Lol, what a low level of learning, unbelievable!

I really think this one has a college education! Wink

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

My guts had nothing to do with it - though I am feeling a little full after my daughter's birthday cake yesterday. I'm not the only one doesn't think Stevenson is worth reading - I'm pretty sure he didn't make the NY Times bestseller list. If his theories are so convincing you'd expect him to be a household name up there with Newton and Einstein.
You're right though, I am under-educated. I only have a BA(Hons) in history from the University of Sydney and I bet you have a PhD in quantum physics from MIT or Harvard or something. I still think you're an idiot though. Goodbye.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Quote:
This is why people are calling you a fool. You haven't the foggiest notion of what is or isn't science, yet you make these stupid judgement posts again and again.

Really?

Can you elaborate on that?

I just don't go along with the scientific religion, of course people won't like that, it's like blasphemie to them.
Furthermore I don't care about people calling me a fool. I am just searching for truth,
If that makes me a fool in their , and your eyes, so be it.
Get it over with.

btw have YOu read the book by Ian Stevenson?

Right! Thought so!

A very small portion of the criticisms against Stevenson's works:

The major problem with Stevenson’s work is that the methods he used to investigate alleged cases of reincarnation are inadequate to rule out simple, imaginative storytelling on the part of the children claiming to be reincarnations of dead individuals. In the seemingly most impressive cases Stevenson (1975, 1977) has reported, the children claiming to be reincarnated knew friends and relatives of the dead individual. The children’s knowledge of facts about these individuals is, then, somewhat less than conclusive evidence for reincarnation.[41]
David Barker an associate of Stevenson discovered that the famous reincarnation case of the child Rakesh Gaur had acquired through normal means the information.[42] Barker, who worked with Satwant Pasricha in the investigation of 59 alleged reincarnation cases "could not find a single case in which there was convincing evidence of the presence of paranormal process."[43]
The linguist Sarah Thomason has commented on an analysis by Stevenson on a lady known as "TE" who claimed to be able to speak Swedish, learned in a past life. According to Thomason "Stevenson is... unsophisticated about language" and TE’s Swedish is unconvincing as the other cases she examined.[44][45] Thomason concluded "the linguistic evidence is too weak to provide support for the claims of xenoglossy."[46] The psychologist David Lester has written Stevenson's subjects made grammatical mistakes, mispronounced words and did not show a wide vocabulary of words in foreign language; thus cannot be considered evidence for xenoglossy.[47]

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

A very small portion of the criticisms against Stevenson's works:

The major problem with Stevenson’s work is that the methods he used to investigate alleged cases of reincarnation are inadequate to rule out simple, imaginative storytelling on the part of the children claiming to be reincarnations of dead individuals. In the seemingly most impressive cases Stevenson (1975, 1977) has reported, the children claiming to be reincarnated knew friends and relatives of the dead individual. The children’s knowledge of facts about these individuals is, then, somewhat less than conclusive evidence for reincarnation.[41]
David Barker an associate of Stevenson discovered that the famous reincarnation case of the child Rakesh Gaur had acquired through normal means the information.[42] Barker, who worked with Satwant Pasricha in the investigation of 59 alleged reincarnation cases "could not find a single case in which there was convincing evidence of the presence of paranormal process."[43]
The linguist Sarah Thomason has commented on an analysis by Stevenson on a lady known as "TE" who claimed to be able to speak Swedish, learned in a past life. According to Thomason "Stevenson is... unsophisticated about language" and TE’s Swedish is unconvincing as the other cases she examined.[44][45] Thomason concluded "the linguistic evidence is too weak to provide support for the claims of xenoglossy."[46] The psychologist David Lester has written Stevenson's subjects made grammatical mistakes, mispronounced words and did not show a wide vocabulary of words in foreign language; thus cannot be considered evidence for xenoglossy.47]

Nice,
BUT that wasn't my question!!
My question was "Have you read the book by an Ian Stevenson?"
Not if there is any criticism. of course there is with issues like this.,
so what?

So, read carefully now, ok?

Quote:

Have you read the book by an Ian Stevenson?

A yes or no will suffice.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Has anybody ever won the lottery?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Have you read the book by an Ian Stevenson?

0 Replies

@Pearlylustre,

It makes me smile when friends say,

Quote:

Has anybody ever won the lottery?

And then we laugh.

.

2 Replies

@ekename,

Eek! How long have you been standing there for?

1 Reply

@Pearlylustre,

Incarnate is Forever

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSIYM2xxUQuw6wZ4Y-A8G644HebrGQLlBiSOH-dfA8LwpP7tjALAw

1 Reply

@ekename,

????

0 Replies

@ekename,

ekename wrote:

It makes me smile when friends say,

Quote:
Has anybody ever won the lottery?

And then we laugh.

.

Perhaps you could let us in on the humor.

0 Replies

is Reincarnations theory true ??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know