Proof of reincarnation

[bruto]

It seems to me that there's one other thing that's absolutely necessary for reincarnation to be true: occurrence.

 

[Mashuna]

Groaaaan. Looks like Rodney missed the joke though.

ETA: Oh, and BTW. Nominated.

Thank you .

It's not a proper pun unless it causes someone physical pain.

 

[marplots]

If the proof is that the kid knew information, "that only a specific fighter pilot would know" and that fighter pilot is dead, how could you check the information? If no one knows it?

So, for instance, I can tell you all about the mole I had on my bum when I was Julius Caesar. It's just the sort of thing only Julius would know. I guess what really puzzles me though is how mistaken I have been (as shown by old films) about my own childhood. Or for that matter, last week.

The stuff you'd expect them to remember would be phone numbers or shoe sizes. Any US citizen who comes back would remember their social security number I'd think.

 

[RichardR]

Having looked into the story further, the Natoma Bay, being an escort carrier, didn't have a squadron of Corsairs, but rather Wildcats, which was typical of that class of carrier. So James Huston would have been flying a Wildcat when he was shot down.

Yes he was - a major inconsistency in the story.

Here are some other reasons why this does not "prove" reincarnation.

 

[sadhatter]

Why is it " proof" of anything paranormal is always, and i mean always, not anything any thinking person would consider " proof".

"proof" of ghost stories is a broken statue from the night your grandma's ghost knocked it over.

" proof" that someone is psychic is that they told a 50 year old woman they had a dead male relative.

" proof " of reincarnation is a kid that says some information about ww2.

This is not proof, this is .....nothing. This is something that could be accomplished in any number of ways, and not at all something that would lead someone who is not already convinced to think that any of the ideas are true.

It boils down to the fact that we always state, but no one will ever admit, that believers have a very low standard of evidence, because they are already believers. I spit in the face of the concept that these people are applying any critical thinking to situations like this. If they were a kid talking about ww2 would not even register on the "proof radar".

 

[gerg]

Here's another one

http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm324796.html

 

[jakesteele]

It seems odd that we never hear that someone, in a past life, was a chinese peasant who lead a dull life cultivating rice. The statistical probabilities of such a previous life are enormous. But no, most past lives seem to be full of glamour and adventure, frequently at important moments in history. We hear narratives filled with Holywood style stereotypes.

Actually, back in Shirley McLaine's heyday so many people were saying they were Jesus and other famous people, it became embarrassing. So the trend was to be someone as lowly and ignominious as possible. Shirley opted for being a temple prostitute in ancient Egypt.

 

[yomero]

Reincarnation...ok. Someone please explain. There are lots, lots, lots (I mean lots) more people alive today than ever before. Assume reincarnation, where to all of the extra bodies/souls come from?

If non-physical planes exist, the extras come come from there. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_(cosmology)

So if it's an imaginary WW2 fighter, does that count as a non-physical plane?

Do I have to buy transcendental tickets to board the non-physical plane?

What happens when one of those non-physical planes crashes? Maybe the souls flying inside get split into many pieces from the impact and that accounts for there being more souls now than in earlier centuries.

Having profound thoughts (without any evidence) is fun!

 

[Tempest_Rage]

<snip>

Having profound thoughts (without any evidence) is fun!

That's the whole problem isn't it? Then skeptics get viewed as the killjoys who want to take away all their "profound" fun

 

[Miss_Kitt]

If you watch the video until the end you see that he was allegedly a very specific fighter pilot and the child allegedly had information that only that particular person would know.

Italics added.

I always have to laugh at that: If only that particular person would know, then how do you validate it? Oh, wait, there's a way to validate? Then there's a way for the subject to have gained the information, too.

Given how fallible human memory is, it is amazing to think that those who have returned are able to remember things so accurately despite the fog of their present (and perhaps intervening) life memories.

I also must point out that if the souls are coming from some Other Place--be it a different plane or a different planet--why do they have memories from only prior Earth lives?!

Just not able to suspend my disbelief that far, MK

ETA I see now that others have already brought up these points. Serves me right for posting before I finished reading the thread...

 

[GrandMasterFox]

If reincarnation is possible and likely to occur, why don't any of the woos go and put their money in a trust or something without letting anyone know about it.

If you really reincarnate, simply walk back to the bank and claim your money.
The intrest you'll have would be large enough to make the MDC look like a joke.

Basically, it's the same notion as the hudini password.

Now how many of the so called reincarnators are insnaely rich by this fashion?

 

[Fnord]

Reincarnation is a myth ... a fantasy ... a lie people use to comfort themselves regarding death.

 

[Explorer]

Having looked into the story further, the Natoma Bay, being an escort carrier, didn't have a squadron of Corsairs, but rather Wildcats, which was typical of that class of carrier. So James Huston would have been flying a Wildcat when he was shot down.

He was flying a Wildcat when he was shot down, this is an historical fact.

However, before Huston joined up with the Natoma Bay and VC-81, he was part of an elite special squadron, the VF-301 Devil’s Disciples, from January to August of 1944. The elite squadron test-flew Corsairs for carrier use, and only 20 pilots were selected for this assignment.

Now this still doesn't prove anything, only that if it is "transferrable" memories involved here, like our own memories, they perhaps can get confused with events and position in time.

I have a childhood memory of a WW2 German jet fighter (I was born in 1945), I think it was the ME 262. Now I have never seen one, but I did see a photograph of one when I was ten years old, and it had a strange familiarity about it. The jet pods on the wings seemed right and natural. Why I had this feeling, I can't explain, and I know it means nothing really, except perhaps that the mind can play memory tricks on us.

Could there be a scientific explanation of these remembered past lives? We know that behaviour can be passed down through the genes, but memories?

Reincarnation in most cases suggests something other than an inherited memory, and more a case of a deceased person'e life experiences hijacking another's memory banks.

Very difficult, if not impossible, to prove scientifically, and so it surely has to be put down to some kind of internalised neural creativity coupled with co-incidence, rather like hypnotic regression and the ideometer effect that can be experienced through the ouja board.

 

[Sledge]

Could there be a scientific explanation of these remembered past lives?

Yes. Here it is again:

Reincarnation is a myth ... a fantasy ... a lie people use to comfort themselves regarding death.

 

[Marduk]

I have a childhood memory of a WW2 German jet fighter (I was born in 1945), I think it was the ME 262. Now I have never seen one, but I did see a photograph of one when I was ten years old, and it had a strange familiarity about it. The jet pods on the wings seemed right and natural. Why I had this feeling, I can't explain, and I know it means nothing really, except perhaps that the mind can play memory tricks on us.

I also get that same feeling when looking at the ME262, like a "shark", but then I get the same feeling about "Arbeit macht frei". if you had to encapsulate some of the most memorable things about Nazi activity during the second world war, they would both be high on the list

Could there be a scientific explanation of these remembered past lives? We know that behaviour can be passed down through the genes, but memories?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164893&highlight=brain+storage&page=2
post 62 onwards

Yes. Here it is again:

Oh I agree, but unlike traditional religious concepts, reincarnation comes up again and again in disparate cultures with no known links between them, perhaps something internal is driving this myth that we don't understand

 

[Sledge]

I'm sure something internal IS driving this myth, but I wouldn't call fear of death something we don't understand.

 

[Mirrorglass]

Oh I agree, but unlike traditional religious concepts, reincarnation comes up again and again in disparate cultures with no known links between them, perhaps something internal is driving this myth that we don't understand

Pray tell, what traditional religious concepts don't come up again and again in disparate cultures?

 

[Marduk]

Pray tell, what traditional religious concepts don't come up again and again in disparate cultures?

as well known examples :-
Monotheism
Heaven and Hell
Satan

These concepts can be shown to have an unbroken line back to one origin which spread from ancient times to where it today spreads over multiple faiths and beliefs

Reincarnation isn't like that, it starts as an original myth in many ancient cultures, and over time has been supplanted by the above speading concepts.

see one type starts with many adherents and is depopularised by more effective religious dogma, while the others start with one adherent and is then spread by its effectiveness at controlling large populations until it is the norm

Reincarnation is not a belief that keeps people in line. If they truly believe that when they die they get another and another and another chance at life then its liberating, not opressive

So reincarnation is not at all typical of religiously spread dogma, it does it backwards, so there must be some internal mechanism or reason why it seems to spring up everywhere at once in the Ancient world without any apparent precedent.

Scientifically this could be explained by it being the major belief of our main ancestral group who left Africa 60,000 years ago, or there may be other reasons not yet explained such as Explorer mentioned with perhaps some intuition or memories being passed genetically along with our instincts which fool people under certain circumstances to believe those memories or instincts are something that they directly experienced rather than one pased to them genetically by a dead member of their direct lineage.

After all, if you have a memory in your head from an ancestor which says "stay away from unripe eggplant" how would you know that it wasn't something that you yourself remember from your own lifetime. If you are then remembering "stay away from unripe eggplant" while at the same time remembering that the person saying it was an indian Sufi at the time of the Raj, it would be very easy to think you have a past life memory and the brain being what it is will always try to put that recall into some kind of context. The most easy to understand always being "you were there"

Not very sceptical imo to just dismiss something which you have no experience of just because you don't believe it has any validity.

However, this doesn't explain the claims made for James Leininger as he is not related to the person hes claiming to be so can't have passed down memories of that life. That is far more likely a result of parental influence and publishing committment and $$$$$$$ than anything else

 

[Mirrorglass]

as a well known example
Monotheism
Heaven and Hell
Satan

These concepts can be shown to have an unbroken line back to one origin which spread from ancient times to where it today spreads over multiple faiths and beliefs

I would suggest that is cobblers. There are many old religions where there was a single God, or a single ruler God ruling over a Pantheon of lesser divine beings. The latter idea is not so far from the Christian God, who rules a host of divine beings, such as angels or his son - they just aren't called gods. As for heaven and hell, I'm surprised you could even think those are original to Abrahamic religions. The idea of an underworld where the dead dwell is very common, as is a celestial plane where gods reside. The Abrahamic versions aren't really all that different.

Reincarnation isn't like that, it starts as an original myth in many ancient cultures, and over time has been supplanted by the above speading concepts.

Which is exactly what every other religious concept is. The idea of reincarnation is not historically more common than the idea of the dead descending underground to a land of the dead, or flying up to heavens to afterlife.

see one type starts with many adherents and is depopularised by more effective religious dogma, while the others start with one adherent and is then spread by its effectiveness at controlling large populations until it is the norm

As I've stated, this is not the case.

Reincarnation is not a belief that keeps people in line. If they truly believe that when they die they get another and another and another chance at life then its liberating, not opressive

You do realize that most religions that believe in reincarnation also believe in Karma or something similar, meaning that the actions taken in this life affect the quality of the second. Many also believe it's possible to exit the circle of reincarnation to enter Nirvana or such - note the similarity with Heaven. These religions also impose strict sets of rules and speak of punishment after death to those who break them. Your idea of "liberating" reincarnation is not one derived from ancient religions all over the world; it's just New-Agey silliness.

So reincarnation is not at all typical of religiously spread dogma, it does it backwards, so there must be some internal mechanism or reason why it seems to spring up everywhere at once without precedent.

You haven't really presented any evidence that "reincarnation springs up everywhere without precedent" any more than any other religious idea does, or that it "is not at all typical of religiously spread dogma". And even if we were to accept the concept is somehow special, it would not necessarily follow that "there must be some internal mechanism or reason" for it.

Scientifically this could be explained by it being the major belief of our main ancestral group who left Africa 60,000 years ago, or there may be other reasons not yet explained such as Explorer mentioned with perhaps some intuition or memories being passed genetically along with our instincts which fool people under certain circumstances to believe those memories or instincts are something that they directly experienced rather than one of their direct lineage.

I'd like to say memories passing on through genes is impossible, but to be accurate, I'll just say according to anything we know of biology, especially genetics and memory, memories passing on through genes is impossible. Even more importantly, there is no observed phenomenon which such a model would explain better, or even equally well, than the models we currently have. Basically, it seems the idea is impossible, and there's no evidence for the idea, so insisting there's something to it anyway is kind of silly.

After all, if you have a memory in your head from an ancestor which says "stay away from unripe eggplant" how would you know that it wasn't something that you yourself remember from your own lifetime. If you are then remembering "stay away from unripe eggplant" while at the same time remembering that the person saying it was an indian Sufi at the time of the Raj, it would be very easy to think you have a past life memory and the brain being what it is will always try to put that recall into some kind of context. The most easy to understand always being "you were there"

Certainly, reincarnation might be more easy to understand than actual psychology. Similarly, the idea of a flat Earth is more easy to understand than actual astrology, and the idea of demons possessing humans is easier to understand than germ theory. But it should be clear that none of the ideas are any more correct because of their simpleness.

Not very sceptical imo to just dismiss something which you have no experience of just because you don't believe it has any validity.

I'm not dismissing anything; just saying that reincarnation is very unlikely, and the evidence you have presented doesn't hold water. And it's not that I believe reincarnation has no validity - it's simply that your arguments have none.

However, this doesn't explain the claims made for James Leininger as he is not related to the person hes claiming to be so can't have passed down memories of that life. That is far more likely a result of parental influence and publishing committment and $$$$$$$ than anything else

Well, yes. That we agree on.

 

[Marduk]

I would suggest that is cobblers. There are many old religions where there was a single God, or a single ruler God ruling over a Pantheon of lesser divine beings. The latter idea is not so far from the Christian God, who rules a host of divine beings, such as angels or his son - they just aren't called gods. As for heaven and hell, I'm surprised you could even think those are original to Abrahamic religions. The idea of an underworld where the dead dwell is very common, as is a celestial plane where gods reside. The Abrahamic versions aren't really all that different.

See if you can follow this, Monotheism was first practiced on a limited scale in Egypt, with Akhenaten and simultaneously in Babylon with Bel Marduk. What a surprise then that the Monotheism that is the norm today spread from the influence of the Hebrews who were directly influenced by Egypt and Babylonia. Hell started with a belief in the underworld and was again spread to the Hebrews who perfected it, packaged it and passed it on. Satan has the same story, Those three examples I gave perfectly demonstrate your request for an example. We're not talking about similar, we are talking about what influenced modern beliefs. You asked a question I answered it, btw putting words in my mouth "I'm surprised you could even think those are original to Abrahamic religions" don't do you any credit when my actual words are posted just above your misinterpretation of them

Which is exactly what every other religious concept is. The idea of reincarnation is not historically more common than the idea of the dead descending underground to a land of the dead, or flying up to heavens to afterlife.

Every ancient culture had a belief that the common people would live again on this planet after death, heaven was just for the Kings and Aristocracy and those who could afford the correct preparation for their afterlife with the Gods. The underworld again was just for those who messed up spectacularly and so needed to be sent somewhere as an example to others. That is religious Dogma the same as heaven. At the same time with reincarnation you dont go up or down, you just come back over and over. The list of ancient adherents to reincarnation is a famous and numerous one and matches quite well the list of those who understood that religious Dogma was unlikely to hold any answers, Gautam Buddha, Mahavir the Tirthankar of Jainism, Pythagoras, Plato, Socrates, Patañjali, Pherecydes of Syros, etc etc

As I've stated, this is not the case.

Yes I'm sure your unsupported rhetoric is important to you but I'm afraid it doesn't hold much weight with anyone who knows better. I am making a simple case here, heaven, hell and satan are spread by religious dogma, reincarnation is not. Do you dispute that ?

You do realize that most religions that believe in reincarnation also believe in Karma or something similar, meaning that the actions taken in this life affect the quality of the second. Many also believe it's possible to exit the circle of reincarnation to enter Nirvana or such - note the similarity with Heaven. These religions also impose strict sets of rules and speak of punishment after death to those who break them. Your idea of "liberating" reincarnation is not one derived from ancient religions all over the world; it's just New-Agey silliness.

Not at all, you are confusing the modern view of heaven with reincarnation. The ancient view of heaven was not at all similar to the dogma exhibited today, why do you think that Kings and Pharoahs bothered to go to all the trouble of ensuring they reached heaven after death if the common man could reach it without any assistance at all, seems to be a big wide chasm between what you think and what they thought, are you sure you are not diffusing actual ancient belief with what youre opinion is telling you they believed. Perhaps more study on the ancient world and its beliefs would be of service to you here.

You haven't really presented any evidence that "reincarnation springs up everywhere without precedent" any more than any other religious idea does, or that it "is not at all typical of religiously spread dogma". And even if we were to accept the concept is somehow special, it would not necessarily follow that "there must be some internal mechanism or reason" for it.

It was true in Mesopotamia

The belief in resurrection was so well suited to the Mesopotamian view of life, that the wonder would be, not that they should have conceived of it, but rather that they should not. For to them, more than any other people of antiquity, this belief lay ready to hand. They saw the sun rise and set from day to day, and to them it was a mystery requiring explanation. They pondered over it and found its place in their mythology and religion. They saw the passage of the sun from the summer to the winter solstice and back again, year after year; the cycle of the moon's phases; and venus disappear as the evening star only to reappear as the morning star. All these changes represented to them the life and death of the gods, and their restoration to life. It would be strange indeed if the Mesopotamians, with such a lively conception of the return to life of the gods above them, and the animals and plants below, never asked themselves, "will not man too sometimes come forth from the underworld?

That belief was there from the outset
It was true in ancient egypt that the Upper classes believed they would be reborn in Maat (heaven) but that isn't reincarnation, that is resurrection. The common people believed they would come back and assist more Kings and Pharoahs to attain heaven in exactly the same way as the Mesopotamians. These are the oldest two civilisations, personally I think that one influenced the other, the similarities in their cosmology are rampant, it has been surmised that reincarnation was an idea that existed with Proto Indo European language. Perhaps all we are seeing is exactly the same as heaven/hell/satan, with reincarnation being the standard belief but are just missing the first parts of that because they took place before language was capable of recording them. That would also explain how the idea is there in numerous cultures yet is not part of the standard religious belief of the day, a kind of folk belief as opposed to a religiously sponsored one.

I'd like to say memories passing on through genes is impossible, but to be accurate, I'll just say according to anything we know of biology, especially genetics and memory, memories passing on through genes is impossible. Even more importantly, there is no observed phenomenon which such a model would explain better, or even equally well, than the models we currently have. Basically, it seems the idea is impossible, and there's no evidence for the idea, so insisting there's something to it anyway is kind of silly.

Explain then how instinct is not a function of genetic inheritence, instinct is stored in the Hypothalamus, the same centre where we store our long term memories and they are inherited, for instance if it wasn't for our ancestors discovering that they were much safer sleeping at night you would not be up and about in the daytime now. Instincts are recognised to be behaviours that are passed genetically because they increased the chances of the original organism of passing on its genes. So they are passed genetically, why not all the other data that stored in the hypothalamus. Any idea what the storage capacity of the brain is Mirrorglass ?

Certainly, reincarnation might be more easy to understand than actual psychology. Similarly, the idea of a flat Earth is more easy to understand than actual astrology, and the idea of demons possessing humans is easier to understand than germ theory. But it should be clear that none of the ideas are any more correct because of their simpleness.

I am not saying reincarnation is valid, I am just explaining why people think it is. It was not a form of woo thinking for ancient peoples but a result of observation of their environment. There are reasons that the idea was so popular back then and isnt now. I thought we were investigating them, with your above claim you are moving the goalposts

I'm not dismissing anything; just saying that reincarnation is very unlikely, and the evidence you have presented doesn't hold water. And it's not that I believe reincarnation has no validity - it's simply that your arguments have none.

Ok thats because you have been unable to comprehend that I am not talking about its validity, but the fact that it is an enigma that is not the result of forced religious belief. Even today, the vast majority of people who have a reincarnation experience do not belong to a belief system that advocates it. James Leininger here may not be a good example as I believe its fraudulent, but hes from an orthodox christian family. Which doesn't teach this

To be clear, I was not at any point attempting to prove that there is any validity in reincarnation, just that there are things that explain a belief in it which to an ancient world mindset make perfect sense. That the idea has been championed in the modern world by a bunch of woos who like to dance naked around campfires or by dubious parents who want everyone to believe that Junior is special while at the same time milking the gullibility of the general public for cash is none of my concern


btw if your response to this post is going to be another tirade against my "lack of understanding" or scoffing at my "lack of knowledge" you'll soon find yourself marginalised by a lot of posters here who know exactly what my area of knowledge is and that it isn't in any way oxymoronic to this discussion