• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of reincarnation

gerg said:
No conclusive proof but a strong belief. Likewise, there is no conclusive proof for the theory of evolution and yet a lot of people believe in it.
Click to expand...


Proof has meaning only in mathematics, you dolt.

There is an incredible amount of evidence that supports evolution.

There is no evidence that supports reincarnation.

You only get this one life and you're wasting it on this garbage?

Serves you right.
 
gerg said:
Reincarnation I admit is still a theory at this stage. Like as in the theory of evolution..
Click to expand...


Words mean things. Have some respect.

Your understanding of science is remarkably absent.

What is wrong with you?
 
gerg said:
Marduk, once again, I'm not religious...How silly do you feel?
Click to expand...


Normally, it takes generations of religious belief to arrive at ignorance as concentrated as yours.

Are you trying to tell us that you got this stupid on your own, without a Cliffs Notes version to guide the way?
 
Complexity said:
Proof has meaning only in mathematics, you dolt.

There is an incredible amount of evidence that supports evolution.

There is no evidence that supports reincarnation.

You only get this one life and you're wasting it on this garbage?

Serves you right.
Click to expand...
In steps the "complexity" guy and starts talking mathematics like it has anything to do with anything. Heard of the phrase "price of fish in China"? No evidence of reincarnation!? I suppose you're going to go on about Trigonometry or something now! You gotta get out more boy. There's a big world out there beyond your computer.
 
gerg said:
In steps the "complexity" guy and starts talking mathematics like it has anything to do with anything. Heard of the phrase "price of fish in China"? No evidence of reincarnation!? I suppose you're going to go on about Trigonometry or something now! You gotta get out more boy. There's a big world out there beyond your computer.
Click to expand...


How does "Eve's Bites" by Ian Wishart totally discredit Dawkins?
 
gerg said:
In steps the "complexity" guy and starts talking mathematics like it has anything to do with anything. Heard of the phrase "price of fish in China"? No evidence of reincarnation!? I suppose you're going to go on about Trigonometry or something now! You gotta get out more boy. There's a big world out there beyond your computer.
Click to expand...


Feel free to continue being wrong.

I wasn't introducing math to the discussion, I was removing 'proof'. It is a word that you don't get to use. 'Evidence' can be used, 'proof' can not.

'price of fish in China'?

At least I understand how a computer works at nearly all levels. You are merely a superstitious fool banging away on the keys.

What an idiot.
 
gerg said:
Tell me about it on this website if you say you are not religious skeptics don't believe you. Why? Because Skepticism is the attitude of doubt. If you feel that nobody can be trusted, then keep your allegiance to skepticism, and enjoy its attitude of self-reinforced doubt.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? Did you think I was defending you or, something? It seems you completely misunderstood my post.

Skepticism isn't really the attitude of doubt; it's an appetite for evidence. A skeptic will believe in the theory that is most convincing according to the evidence available.

So, why do people not believe you are not religious? Let's take a look at the evidence. On one hand, we have your bald statement "I am not religious". Not very convincing, as the religious are known to be prone to both lying and just being mistaken. On the other hand, in the very same post you made the statement "our spirit is that part of us that transcends time and links us to the Divine". So, you've clearly shown that you believe in 1) a spirit, 2) "transcending time" and 3) the frickin' Divine. And you expect us to believe that despite believing in these three staples of a religious worldview, you are somehow not religious?

Yeah, I'm starting to see why you have trouble believing in evolution.
 
Mirrorglass said:
Wait, what? Did you think I was defending you or, something? It seems you completely misunderstood my post.

Skepticism isn't really the attitude of doubt; it's an appetite for evidence. A skeptic will believe in the theory that is most convincing according to the evidence available.

So, why do people not believe you are not religious? Let's take a look at the evidence. On one hand, we have your bald statement "I am not religious". Not very convincing, as the religious are known to be prone to both lying and just being mistaken. On the other hand, in the very same post you made the statement "our spirit is that part of us that transcends time and links us to the Divine". So, you've clearly shown that you believe in 1) a spirit, 2) "transcending time" and 3) the frickin' Divine. And you expect us to believe that despite believing in these three staples of a religious worldview, you are somehow not religious?

Yeah, I'm starting to see why you have trouble believing in evolution.
Click to expand...
Typical. Confusing Spirituality with Religion again. Don't know why I bother with you lot..
 
gerg said:
Typical. Confusing Spirituality with Religion again. Don't know why I bother with you lot..
Click to expand...

'Tis all the same thing, no matter what you call it. You believe in a divinity, you're religious, spiritual, woo and a ton of other not-so-flattering adjectives.

I do also wonder why you bother. You obviously don't want to learn anything, least of all critical thinking, so why do you spend so much time on a forum dedicated to those things?
 
gerg said:
That just suggests you know little about the subject
Click to expand...
Not really, it suggests that you do not know what the basis for hypnotherapy, confabulation and suggestion is.

Care to present a study for analysis, or do you just want to assert that they are meaningful? So where is the data to examine? You present it and then we can see what the data actually shows.

(That is the common cry of the JREF)
 
gerg said:
Here's a good link for info on Regression Hypnotherapy http://www.spiritualregression.org/
Anyone care to debunk Dr Michael Newton? Oh, and "it's bullocks" doesn't count as a debunking.
Click to expand...

Well here you go,
A special application of hypnosis, called Hypnotic Regression, has been helpful in assisting individuals to recover memories locked within the mind that are difficult or impossible to specifically recall during waking consciousness and yet still influence behavior, feelings, and outlook today.
Click to expand...

Now where is the data that tells us this?
1. That actual memories that are valid are recovered?
2. That the 'memories' are not confabulation, a well known phenomena.
3. That the 'memories' are not the product of suggestion?

So there is an assertion but no evidence.

Hypnotic Regression permits access to memories that are not limited to the brief span of time that consciousness has occupied our physical body.
Click to expand...

Now where is the data that tells us this?
1. That actual memories that are valid are recovered?
2. That the 'memories' are not confabulation, a well known phenomena.
3. That the 'memories' are not the product of suggestion?
 
gerg said:
Well this point for instance Hypnotic Regression may be applied to cut vertically through time or horizontally through "layers of consciousness." While in hypnotic trance, many individuals are able to access a deeper, more complete understanding of themselves and their potentials than is typical of the ordinary waking state. For lack of a precise vocabulary, it is as if one shifts from the psychological to a spiritual dimension of being. Spirituality in this sense is not to be confused with religious belief or dogma; "spirit" is an energetic essence that exists within us all. From the accounts of those who have encountered Past Life Regression, our spirit is that part of us that transcends time and links us to the Divine. Our human form is reported to drape an awareness that has existed in other bodies and, upon the death of the physical body, will leave to assume other forms. Contained within our spirit are the memories and awareness of all we have been and all who we are."
Click to expand...

Okay and that data that shows this theory is a valid representation the data is?
 
gerg said:
Come on Sledge I thought it was too obvious to point out but regression hypnotherapy suggests we reincarnate and this thread is about reincarnation is it not??!! Is that enough "relevance" for you!!??
Click to expand...

Hi, Welcome to the JREF!

You have presented a speculative assertion that something is occurring, also called a hypothesis, in this case the theory would be that there is a transcendent spirit which conveys this information between lives.

Therefore we need the following:

1. A protocol and procedure, with blinding.
2. Data which shows a person has memories that can not be acquired from other sources (hence the blinding)
3. That the 'memory' actually has some way of either not being vague or introduced by other means.

So if you show valid data that is evidence that a person acquired knowledge through a spirit that shows they had a memory they could not have had from another source and is significant, you will have supported your theory. :)
 
gerg said:
Tell me about it on this website if you say you are not religious skeptics don't believe you. Why? Because Skepticism is the attitude of doubt. If you feel that nobody can be trusted, then keep your allegiance to skepticism, and enjoy its attitude of self-reinforced doubt.
Click to expand...

No, you have it wrong, which is not uncommon. It is not that we doubt people, although at times that is important. It is that we doubt the interpretation of the data and the theories of explanation.

That is what the scepticism and critical thinking are about.
 
gerg said:
That's not a debunking. That's just your personal opinion. No different to "the theory of evolution is ridiculous"
Click to expand...

Now for this to be equivalence we would need to have two things:

1. the data that supports the 'theory of reincarnation' as evidenced by the practice of hypnotic regression.

2. the data that supports the 'theory of evolution' as evidenced by various means.

So when you present the data we can examine #1, another thread exists to examine #2.

We apply the same standard to all, if you want to discuss the theory of evolution another thread has been set aside for that. :)

You have not presented #1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom