• 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.

Hello from a non-skeptic

Charles, this is slightly OT but there's something that's been bothering me about your book.

Originally posted by Charles Boden
The agent I am working with had promised to revise it before publication, which wasn't done, so indeed I apologise for some errors in it which were not seen under my own revision and actually derived from the final Window's "grammar and spell check" I made.
Click to expand...

Why did you need an agent for a book published by CreateSpace, which is basically a vanity press? I hope you haven't been conned.

Mods, I for one am not happy about the removal of my posts to AAH. Considering what goes on in DOC's never-ending New Testament thread I think Charles was let off lightly.
 
Little 10 Toes said:
It doesn't matter if you give us permission or not.

Please read up on Fair Use. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)
Click to expand...

Les and I were both very careful to make sure that the commentary and criticism far outweighed the excerpts from the book, too. It is clearly a case of Fair Use.

I would like to know what Charles' beef is with imagination. There are many things he imagines are beyond the scope of imagination and therefore must be paranormal. At the same time, in his book he imagines what the cave people must have imagined when they looked at the stars. For someone who isn't capable of imagining certain things, he certainly imagines a lot of other things. I for one find it puzzling and disturbing.
 
Last edited:
Apology said:
I would like to know what Charles' beef is with imagination.
Click to expand...

So would I.

This "how can a person imagine things he hasn't personally experienced?" mindset amongst believers in reincarnation is baffling. Do they think that writers of westerns draw on their previous lives as gunslingers and cowboys? Are science fiction authors remembering lives lived on other planets or foreseeing their future lives? How on earth do people who lead isolated lives untouched by romance or sex (I'm talking about you, Bronte sisters!) write passionately romantic novels? Well, the magic word is IMAGINATION, you twerps!

Everyone is surrounded by sources of information about things they don't personally experience in everyday life. It's impossible not to take in information about the past that can be recycled as a reincarnation fantasy - even people who don't read much are still exposed to pictures, films, TV programmes and the memories of older family members.

This contempt for human imagination reminds me of the way Erich von Daniken and his imitators sneer at our "primitive", "savage" ancestors, preferring to believe that their achievements were the work of aliens. :rolleyes:
 
Guys, do as you will. Personally I would also prefer that this thread be ended. It has been no pleasure for me right from the start, and in fact it has been more emotionally draining than you can even imagine. The only reason I have again replied is because I am not willing to permit that Alice's alleged "debunking" of my genealogy should stand without an answer. As for the rest, it is more a question of faith that obviously, if such is true, still cannot be proven by any current knowledge of physics and science.

As further indication of evidence, Alice, John Stewart b. 1645 was married to Margaret McNabbe (b. 18 Nov 1649 at Kenmore), whose grandfather, John MacNab, was born about 1595 at Eillean Ran Castle in Killin, also at the margins of Loch Tay, very near to where the old village of Lawers used to be, which situates John Stewart in that area. As I said to you, I believe I deserve at least the benefit of the doubt on this issue.

The reason I corrected Duncan Stewart as being the 6th lord was because I found that the 2nd Lord of Appin died without issue and the title was passed to his brother.

BTW, "onomatics" was just a typo...

If you guys think I came here just for book promotion, well, then I am even more clever than I thought... From the start, you all jumped to erroneous conclusions about me and my intentions.

As for "Ohshallah", look up Oxalá and you will find the references to him, I'm quite sure...

Could we now end this thread? Or are you going to continue to "promote my book"?
 
Last edited:
If you didn't want conversation, you shouldn't have made new claims. You can't just walz in with another bunch of unlikely assertions and demand no one be allowed to respond. But don't worry; just stay away for a few weeks, and the thread will fade to obscurity. Now that your book's been reviewed, you really aren't interesting enough a subject to keep the thread away for long.

Not that I expect you'll stand for quietness; you had your chance to bow off - yet the moment the thread quieted down, you were back.

It's fine to enjoy attention. But must you keep acting like the people who give you some are swine?
 
Charles, if you don't wish to discuss it, then don't. We may or may not continue discussion without you; that is not up to you, nor should it be.

You do Alice a considerable disservice by calling her work an "alleged debunking." She showed holes in your claims that one could reasonably have expected you to find.

Note that the holes themselves aren't a problem; the problem is the presentation of them as if they are not holes.

If you show a linkage to Charles or the Bonnie Prince but also say "Here and here are two gaps that I only assume are links because of circumstantial evidence," then that's fine.

But if you show the same linkage and ignore those gaps it is a problem.

Likewise linking to your own work as evidence.

It doesn't matter, though. The problems exist regardless if you accept them here or not.

I wish you would stay and discuss, but you are not bound to do so.
 
Charles Boden said:
Guys, do as you will. Personally I would also prefer that this thread be ended. It has been no pleasure for me right from the start, and in fact it has been more emotionally draining than you can even imagine. The only reason I have again replied is because I am not willing to permit that Alice's alleged "debunking" of my genealogy should stand without an answer. As for the rest, it is more a question of faith that obviously, if such is true, still cannot be proven by any current knowledge of physics and science.

As further indication of evidence, Alice, John Stewart b. 1645 was married to Margaret McNabbe (b. 18 Nov 1649 at Kenmore), whose grandfather, John MacNab, was born about 1595 at Eillean Ran Castle in Killin, also at the margins of Loch Tay, very near to where the old village of Lawers used to be, which situates John Stewart in that area. As I said to you, I believe I deserve at least the benefit of the doubt on this issue.

The reason I corrected Duncan Stewart as being the 6th lord was because I found that the 2nd Lord of Appin died without issue and the title was passed to his brother.

BTW, "onomatics" was just a typo...

If you guys think I came here just for book promotion, well, then I am even more clever than I thought... From the start, you all jumped to erroneous conclusions about me and my intentions.

As for "Ohshallah", look up Oxalá and you will find the references to him, I'm quite sure...

Could we now end this thread? Or are you going to continue to "promote my book"?
Click to expand...

Protip:

If you want a thread to end don't post in it.
 
Never mind Bonnie Prince Charlie, Mr Boden appears to be the reincarnation of Dame Nellie Melba. Has he finally gone?
 
Ah, Charles, welcome back.

You don't have to respond to this, but I hope you do:

Initially, you presented what you believed to be memories of a past life as The Young Pretender, amongst which were minstrels (or "a man with a guitar"), army boots, and a feeling of déjà vu on seeing the town of Biggar.

All these things have been shown to be incompatible with the time period of Bonnie Prince Charlie. There may have been other anachronisms discovered, but it's a long thread to trawl through.

Does these incompatibilities cause you to doubt your conviction in reincarnation? If not, how do you reconcile these 'memories' which clearly cannot be actual memories? I am not being snippy, I'm genuinely interested.
 
Charles Boden said:
...As further indication of evidence, Alice, John Stewart b. 1645 was married to Margaret McNabbe (b. 18 Nov 1649 at Kenmore), whose grandfather, John MacNab, was born about 1595 at Eillean Ran Castle in Killin, also at the margins of Loch Tay, very near to where the old village of Lawers used to be, which situates John Stewart in that area. As I said to you, I believe I deserve at least the benefit of the doubt on this issue.
Click to expand...

I don't think debatable claims to royal lineage have ever been given 'the benefit of the doubt'...
 
This is getting very silly indeed. For the love of Kenneth McKellar, let's forget about where John Stewart's grandfather was born and concentrate on why we should believe that the Lady of Lawers was in fact the sister of Sir John Campbell, 1st Earl of Loudon.

Or how about Charles addressing the points raised by Big Les regarding the town of Biggar?
 
Charles Boden said:
A common claim against those who believe in reincarnaion is that "they were always someone famous". In fact this is not true. 99% of people who undergo hypnotic regression have "mental visions" of very normal lives.
Click to expand...

You may be correct that the majority do so - I couldn't say. But the ones that seek public attention certainly seem to go for famous past lives. As you have in making claims relating to Charles Edward Stuart online and in a self-published book.

What remains is the fact that whenever my father used to sing me this song, I used to have "mental visions" such as I have described them. The imagery of a minstrel was an added afterthought.
Click to expand...

As noted by others, this is a quite extraordinary admission that you have knowingly fabricated part of a "vision" of a past-life. Have you decided to switch to writing non-fiction?

And Les, I have not given you permission to quote my book, so could the moderators please remove the link to AAH? BTW, I am very thankful to the moderators here who took the initiative that has been taken.
Click to expand...

The question of Fair Use has already been dealt with. I would just add that despite the comments page for my review being open for the standard two weeks, you did not so much as request that I remove the quotes by posting a comment. Nor did you PM or email me via the forum. Had I not idly decided to recheck this thread, I wouldn't even have been aware of your (groundless) concern. You have quoted the words of others in this very thread - how is that any different?

For those who may have seen the filme "Braveheart", I am descended from literally ALL the main characters in the film.
Click to expand...

Which ones?

The book is what it is intended to be: not an intention to convince, but to share the experiences I went through and that took me to believe in what I do. In truth, it has been an attempt to share the possibility that our lives are not retricted to this one physical existence.
Click to expand...

What is the difference?

Any harm in it being philosophical, Les?
Click to expand...

If you expect your claims to be taken seriously, and if by "philosophical" you mean "economical with the truth" then yes, there is potential harm. If you believe that truth matters, untruth is harmful.

As for "Ohshallah", look up Oxalá and you will find the references to him, I'm quite sure...
Click to expand...

Then why be so obtuse as to use a version of the name that is not only colloquial, but also a non-standard spelling? "Oshala" seems to be the accepted version.

Now, would you care to respond to the substance of my criticism?
 
Big Les said:
I would just add that despite the comments page for my review being open for the standard two weeks, you did not so much as request that I remove the quotes by posting a comment. Nor did you PM or email me via the forum. Had I not idly decided to recheck this thread, I wouldn't even have been aware of your (groundless) concern.
Click to expand...

Good point, Big Les. I've been checking your blog every day in the expectation of seeing a comment from Charles.



.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom