• 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.

Empirical Proofs of reincarnation.

The OP is rich with silliness.

I hit a jackpot with my fourth subject.
Click to expand...
In well-run scientific experiments, all results are jackpots. Falsified the hypothesis? Jackpot! Confirmed the hypothesis? Jackpot! Yielded statistically significant results? Jackpot! Demonstrated no statistical significance? Jackpot!

The jackpotical relevance of your fourth subject should have been identical to the jackpotical relevance of the first three subjects, regardless of the result in the fourth experiment.
 
Buddha said:
(unfortunately he died at the age of 56).
Click to expand...

If you truly believe in reincarnation, why would you find this unfortunate?

Henrik was sitting in a Madrid café and reading a newspaper, it was 1948. “Can you copy a phrase from the newspaper?” I said. Henrik did better than that, he copied the whole paragraph. It was an article about crime statistics, I translated the copied paragraph for him, he had no idea what it meant.
Click to expand...

And then you looked at archives, found that exact edition of that exact paper, and verified that that paragraph was published in that paper, right?
 
Oh! Excuse me, but 'Buddha' I do have a question.

As of right now, I have about 34,000 points on my 'Speedway Card', so if I get reincarnated, then do I get to keep those points?

I thank you and my future self thanks you as well.
 
Not empirical.

Not proof.

You really need to invest in a dictionary.
 
So, this thread isn't going to Buddha's plan either.....

Why is it that the most grandiose claims always come from those who deliver the least.
 
P.J. Denyer said:
Why is it that the most grandiose claims always come from those who deliver the least.
Click to expand...

Because it's not a claim, it's passion play. It's all about how the big mean skeptics just weren't open minded enough to accept his brilliance.

We have to disagree with him. That's our role in all this.
 
Buddha said:
<snipped long anecdote>
Click to expand...


If any of this were true, it should be easily repeatable.

All scientists would have to do is place hidden microphones in 1-3 year olds' rooms and then listen to them babbling. Heck, most parents already have microphones in their babies' rooms.

There are two things that stand out about your stories that makes them questionable.

The first is that these phenomena are not seen worldwide. There should be millions of parents reporting that their children are speaking other languages. Seeing as there are millions if not billions of people worldwide who believe in reincarnation, social stigma would play no part. But, there aren't millions of cases. There are almost none.

The second is your intimate involvement in the anecdotes you present. Even the best and most careful scientists know that the more they become involved with a test, the more likely that their results will reflect their own biases. Ideally, the test should be blind. The scientist should not expect a given result and the subject should not know what is being tested.

But many of these problems can be instantly cleared up. We just need more data. Please provide the names and contact information of the people involved in your anecdotes. I will keep this information completely confidential while I research whether they remember your stories the way you do. I'm sorry that your friend, Joe, passed away. You mention several other people, though. I'd be very happy to talk to them.
 
Okay, seriously:

Buddha, you've received a lot of feeback on your previous threads. Did you take that feedback into account when starting this thread? Given that feedback, what did you expect to happen in this thread, based on your OP?
 
I find not amazing at all that people who have the ability to weave the wildest and most imaginative dreams can come with stories when their focus and capacity to respond to suggestion is heavily enhanced by hypnosis, religious ecstasy or even friendly verbal waterboarding like Joe's. And a believer hearing Joe speaking in tongues and interpreting it as a language related to the Turkish language he doesn't know well (that is what suggested to me that cold reading I told about in a previous post).


In fact the story is not argumentative consistent. In an age of famines proto-Joe is told «“Are you hungry?” “Yes, I am”, said [proto-]Joe. “Move close to the fire, we are cooking dinner,” [how do you say "have some nachos" in Turkish?]... A third man joined the conversation, he said, ”A big battle lies ahead of us.”». How so Henry V of these Turkoid gentlemen to provide a fourth wall for "us" to "prove" "reincarnation"! And how faggoty Saint Sebastianesque the way proto-Joe dies soon later (were them 3 hours?) to provide the needed dramatics -and solid evidence of the oneiric nature of the whole story-. Also how wonderful the words babbled in Turkoid by Joe matched a consistent script without holes when you take into account the real ability of "Buddha" to manage modern Turkish ("to a certain degree" in his words).


There's critical thinking and there are believers.
 
Buddha said:
I hit a jackpot with my fourth subject. Henrik was working on his Engineer Degree in Electrical Engineering at Columbia University. He is from Sweden, he learned English at the school prior to his arrival to the USA on a foreign student visa. He believes in reincarnation and was willing to learn about his past life.

Henrik was sitting in a Madrid café and reading a newspaper, it was 1948. “Can you copy a phrase from the newspaper?” I said. Henrik did better than that, he copied the whole paragraph. It was an article about crime statistics, I translated the copied paragraph for him, he had no idea what it meant.
Click to expand...
This is a fairly feeble jackpot. By the time we are adults, we have seen millions of images - in life, books, papers, movies, on TV, on computers. We know that some people have eidetic memories, so it would not be unreasonable that some people have information stored eidetically, which they are just not able to access under ordinary circumstances. Isn't it entirely possible that Henrik recalled something he had seen and stored IN THIS LIFE, placing himself in the scene as we sometimes do when our memories of an event have become somewhat jumbled?
 
Buddha said:
This method of past lives research requires presence of people who know foreign languages. ..........

Lots of stuff presented with the purpose of re-enforcing Buddha's mind set about the truth of re-encarnation.

...............

There is ample evidence showing that the reincarnation exists, you have to view it with an open mind.
Click to expand...


May I suggest to you Buddha that if your quest is to find truth then seek it with an open mind. Hunting around for proof for a previously held conviction won't do it. Sadly this is what is done by all manner of religious apologists.
 
I predict:

Buddha will ignore all the excellent rebuttal points made here.
Buddha will post more nonsense.
Buddha will ignore all the excellent rebuttal points made to that nonsense.
Buddha will declare victory/mission accomplished.
 
sylvan8798 said:
We know that some people have eidetic memories[...]
Click to expand...

Not in the way you mean it, no. Actual eidetic memories fade within minutes of the stimulus no longer being seen/heard/smelt/whatever. What you're describing is a photographic memory, which has never been shown to exist outside of fiction.
 
sylvan8798 said:
This is a fairly feeble jackpot. By the time we are adults, we have seen millions of images - in life, books, papers, movies, on TV, on computers. We know that some people have eidetic memories, so it would not be unreasonable that some people have information stored eidetically, which they are just not able to access under ordinary circumstances. Isn't it entirely possible that Henrik recalled something he had seen and stored IN THIS LIFE, placing himself in the scene as we sometimes do when our memories of an event have become somewhat jumbled?
Click to expand...


A plausible explanation and your use of the term "eidetic" when referring to memories is quite kosher in spite of Squeegee's protest. Squeegee has been known to get confused at times.:)
 
The Sparrow said:
I predict:

Buddha will ignore all the excellent rebuttal points made here.
Buddha will post more nonsense.
Buddha will ignore all the excellent rebuttal points made to that nonsense.
Buddha will declare victory/mission accomplished.
Click to expand...


The way epistemological hedonists like "Buddha" operate (and we know he is one of those from the other thread and his booklet) is just ignoring the criticism on his "pieces of evidence" and then offer new evidence of similar or inferior quality, turning the thread into an endless cycle of death and rebirth of his "reincarnation", using other personal examples and later just googling it by ear.

The original bit would probably be the dropping of names and "quotations" other than Popper's that may seem pertinent to him. They certainly won't.
 
Buddha said:
“Yes, I am”, said Joe. “Move close to the fire, we are cooking dinner,” said his friend. A third man joined the conversation, he said, ”A big battle lies ahead of us.” After that he said something that I couldn’t understand.”
Click to expand...

It took me a few hours to realise what's wrong with all this: this isn't the way people actually speak, in real life. Rather, it's the way characters in fiction speak when the writer wants to do some rapid plot exposition. If I were making up a conversation and I wanted the person listening to think there was about to be a battle, then I might have a character say "A big battle lies ahead of us." In real life, the character would actually say something like "Give us double portions, if we end up having a scrap tomorrow this might be the last dinner we see in a while." The portentous declaration simply doesn't ring true.

Dave
 
My toddler must speak ancient babbylonian. Anyone who knows him will confirm he babbles alot.
 
6 month old babies don't speak any language, but they do make sounds. It's pretty unremarkable that one of those sounds might be the word that they have probably heard the most in their entire young lives.

ETA - and people in a cult were credulous and believed in silly nonsense? Get outta here.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
It took me a few hours to realise what's wrong with all this: this isn't the way people actually speak, in real life. Rather, it's the way characters in fiction speak when the writer wants to do some rapid plot exposition. If I were making up a conversation and I wanted the person listening to think there was about to be a battle, then I might have a character say "A big battle lies ahead of us." In real life, the character would actually say something like "Give us double portions, if we end up having a scrap tomorrow this might be the last dinner we see in a while." The portentous declaration simply doesn't ring true.

Dave
Click to expand...


A good point. Mind you I would think a more realistic kind of remark would be : "I'm not hungry. Am ******** myself thinking about the fight tomorrow."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom