• 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.

What Evidence Would Be Sufficient To Prove Reincarnation?

Rodney said:
I'm sure that our colleagues will turn up their noses at these journals as well, but pretty obviously radical ideas will not initially be supported in mainstream scientific publications. Consider what the January 13, 1905 Scientific American had to say about the Wright Brothers' "Aeroplane and its Fabled Performance":
Click to expand...
Mainstream scientific publications do get things wrong sometimes. And a significant proportion of research papers are shown to be wrong by later research. That's par for the course.

The seventh-rate literature of the paranormal couldn't find a needle in a needle factory using a needle-detector with a needle taped to it.
 
PixyMisa said:
Mainstream scientific publications do get things wrong sometimes. And a significant proportion of research papers are shown to be wrong by later research. That's par for the course.
Click to expand...

The reincarnation's research has more than 45 years now, and almost all - if not all - the researchers of these cases agree that at least some of these cases requires a paranormal explanation (Antonia Mills, Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, Erlendur Haraldsson, Pasricha, etc.)
 
Vitor Moura said:
The reincarnation's research has more than 45 years now, and almost all - if not all - the researchers of these cases agree that at least some of these cases requires a paranormal explanation (Antonia Mills, Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, Erlendur Haraldsson, Pasricha, etc.)
Click to expand...
Yes.

However, the evidence flatly contradicts them.
 
PixyMisa said:
Yes. And?

New Scientist is a popular science magazine, once quite a good one, now not so much. It is not a peer-reviewed journal.

The Journal of Science and Healing could most charitably be described as "a pseudo-scientific semiliterate hack rag".
Click to expand...

But The Journal of Science and Healing it is a peer-reviewed journal. And is not the only one which published articles about reincarnation. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (Impact factor: 1.810) published too.

a) American Children Who Claim to Remember Previous Lives (1983)
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 171:742-748 Ian Stevenson

b)Three New Cases of the Reincarnation Type in Sri Lanka with Written Records Made before Verification (1988) Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 176:741. Ian Stevenson and Godwin Samararatne

c) Personality and abilities of children claiming previous-life memories. (1995)
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1995, 183(7), 445-451. Erlendur Haraldsson

d) Does the Socio-Psychological Hypothesis Explain Cases of the Reincarnation Type? (1998) Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease. 186(8):504-506, Schouten SA, Stevenson I.
 
Vitor Moura said:
But The Journal of Science and Healing it is a peer-reviewed journal.
Click to expand...
It's not a scientific journal, though.

And is not the only one which published articles about reincarnation. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (Impact factor: 1.810) published too.

a) American Children Who Claim to Remember Previous Lives (1983)
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 171:742-748 Ian Stevenson

b)Three New Cases of the Reincarnation Type in Sri Lanka with Written Records Made before Verification (1988) Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 176:741. Ian Stevenson and Godwin Samararatne

c) Personality and abilities of children claiming previous-life memories. (1995)
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1995, 183(7), 445-451. Erlendur Haraldsson

d) Does the Socio-Psychological Hypothesis Explain Cases of the Reincarnation Type? (1998) Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease. 186(8):504-506, Schouten SA, Stevenson I.
Click to expand...
The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease is (as far as I know) a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.

That studies mental illness.

Are you suggesting that reincarnation claimants are mentally ill? Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing. I ask merely for clarification.
 
PixyMisa said:
It's not a scientific journal, though.


The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease is (as far as I know) a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.

That studies mental illness.

Are you suggesting that reincarnation claimants are mentally ill? Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing. I ask merely for clarification.
Click to expand...

No, I am not. In fact, many studies showed that these children have not mental problems.

In reference c, the conclusion is:

In three cases of children (in Sri Lanka) claiming to remember previous
lives, written records of the child's statements were made before they were
verified. It was possible in each case to find a family that had lost a member
whose life corresponded to the subject's statements. The statements of the
subject, taken as a group, were sufficiently specific so that they could not
have corresponded to the life of any other person. We believe we have excluded normal transmission of the correct information to the subjects and that they obtained the correct information they showed about the concerned deceased person by some paranormal process.

Well, it's clear that:

1) the evidence for reincarnation is much stronger than the evidence for Flat-Earth. So the skeptics used false analogy.

2) there are still articles about reincarnation being published in respected journals

c) even some skeptics agree that there is some evidence for reincarnation.

Now I need to do other important things. I am finishing the discussion here.

Best wishes.
 
I never realized it was an accepted method of argumentation to simply state "It is now clear I was right and you are all wrong" and leave. I need to put this in use.
 
I see. I wonder if the numbering system simply changes halfway or if he's using hexadecimal and mysteriously skipped points three trough eleven.
 
Vitor Moura said:
No, I am not. In fact, many studies showed that these children have not mental problems.

In reference c, the conclusion is:

In three cases of children (in Sri Lanka) claiming to remember previous
lives, written records of the child's statements were made before they were
verified. It was possible in each case to find a family that had lost a member
whose life corresponded to the subject's statements. The statements of the
subject, taken as a group, were sufficiently specific so that they could not
have corresponded to the life of any other person. We believe we have excluded normal transmission of the correct information to the subjects and that they obtained the correct information they showed about the concerned deceased person by some paranormal process.

Well, it's clear that:

1) the evidence for reincarnation is much stronger than the evidence for Flat-Earth.
Click to expand...
Since you have not presented any evidence, and nor has anyone else, no it isn't.

So the skeptics used false analogy.
Click to expand...
The analogy stands.

2) there are still articles about reincarnation being published in respected journals
Click to expand...
Of clinical psychopathology.

c) even some skeptics agree that there is some evidence for reincarnation.
Click to expand...
They're wrong.

Now I need to do other important things. I am finishing the discussion here.
Click to expand...
Bye! Watch the door - oh well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom